Karnataka High Court
Rajashekhar S/O. Sangayya ... vs Smt. Sulochana W/O. Shivanand Salimath on 5 December, 2023
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14232-DB
RFA No. 100061 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100061 OF 2017 (PAR/POS)
BETWEEN:
RAJASHEKHAR S/O. SANGAYYA ULLAGADDIMATH,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED,
R/O: GOKUL ROAD OPP SBM, HUBLI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SANTOSH B. MANE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SULOCHANA W/O. SHIVANAND SALIMATH,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
R/O: C/O: MAHESH NANDIMATH,
POST SANGANAHALLI,
TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
2. SMT. PUSHPA W/O. DUNDAYYA NANDIMATH,
YASHAVANT AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
NARAYANKAR
R/O: C/O: MAHESH NANDIMATH,
POST SANGANAHALLI,
Digitally signed TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
by YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR
Date: 2023.12.08 3. SMT. PREMA W/O. MANJUNATH B.T,
10:04:31 +0530 AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/O: C/O: RAJU NANDIMATH
LIG-223, 10TH CORSS NAVANAGAR,
HUBBALLI-580025.
4. SMT. RATNA W/O. MAHADEVAYYA DHANNUR,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
R/O: LIG-191, HUDCO COLONY,
NEAR SHIVANAND MATH, GADAG.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14232-DB
RFA No. 100061 of 2017
5. VEERANNA S/O. SANGAPPA HANJI,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: ULLAGADDI ONI,
OPP: SAVITA HOTEL, HUBBALLI.
6. PUNDALIK S/O. KRISHNA APPANABAIL,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: KAMADHENU MEDICALS,
OPP: BRINDAVAN LODGE, HUBBALLI.
7. MALLIKARJUN S/O. VEERABHADRAPPA SAVUKAR,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: KAMADHENU MEDICALS,
OPP: BRINDAVAN LODGE, HUBBALLI.
8. KHEEMRAJ S/O. KESAJI RATHOD,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/O: #303, YUNICK APARTMENTS,
DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBBALLI.
9. SWETA W/O. SIDDANAGOUDA GOUDAR,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE AND HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: INAM YARAGOPPA,
TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P.B. DODDAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4;
APPEAL AGAINST TO R5 TO R9 IS DISMISSED)
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 96
OF THE CODE CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
LOWER COURT RECORDS PERSUE THE SAME AND SET ASIDE
THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03-11-2016
PASSED BY THELEARNED III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE HUBBALLI IN OS.NO. 324/2013, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14232-DB
RFA No. 100061 of 2017
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
H.P.SANDESH, J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Shri. S. B. Doddagoudar, learned counsel has filed
vakalath for respondent No.4.
2. The counsel for the appellant filed memo not
pressing the appeal against respondent Nos.5 to 9.
3. In view of the memo, appeal against respondent
Nos.5 to 9 is dismissed.
4. The parties have filed the compromise petition filed
under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
and also produced sketch prepared by the Civil Engineer and so
also CTC map of scheduled properties.
2. On enquiry, parties would also submit that they
know the contents of compromise petition and also the sketch
which has been annexed along with the compromise petition
and sketch depicts the share as per the settlement. They
further submit that they have got settled the matter among
themselves and sketch is also prepared to that effect.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14232-DB
3. The parties understood the terms of compromise. In
view of the compromise entered into between the parties, the
compromise petition is accepted. The appeal stands disposed
of in terms of the compromise petition.
4. Registry is directed to get the signatures of the
parties who are appeared before the Court and their respective
counsels.
5. Registry is directed to draw the final decree in
terms of the compromise petition and to collect necessary duty.
6. The sketch which has been annexed along with the
compromise petition is part and parcel of the final decree.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
