Karnataka High Court

Smt Mohan Ambal vs Sri V Narayana Reddy on 8 June, 2023

Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar

                                               -1-
                                                      NC: 2023:KHC:19532
                                                         RSA No. 872 of 2013




                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                              DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023

                                             BEFORE
                  THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR


                          REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.872 OF 2013 (SP)


                   BETWEEN:

                   1.     SMT MOHAN AMBAL,
                          W/O LATE C.VENKATESHAN,
                          AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
                          R/AT NO.23, K.V.LANE,
                          COTTONPET MAIN ROAD,
                          BANGALORE-560 053.

                   2.     SMT ANITHA,
                          D/O LATE C.VENKATESHAN,
                          AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
                          R/AT NO.23, K.V.LANE,
                          COTTONPET MAIN ROAD,
Digitally signed by       BANGALORE-560 053.
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH      3.    SRI VISHNU
COURT OF
KARNATAKA                 S/O LATE C.VENKATESHAN,
                          AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
                          R/AT NO.23, K.V.LANE,
                          COTTONPET MAIN ROAD,
                          BANGALORE-560 053.

                                                               ...APPELLANTS

                   (BY SRI. D.N.RAMACHANDRAPPA, ADVOCATE)
                              -2-
                                    NC: 2023:KHC:19532
                                         RSA No. 872 of 2013




AND:


   SRI V NARAYANA REDDY
   S/O B.VENKATARAMAN REDDY,
   AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
   R/T GANAPATHIHALLI VILLAGE,
   CHUNCHUNAKUPPE POST,
   THAVAREKERE HOBLI
   BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
   BENGALORE-562 130

                                                ...RESPONDENT


(BY SRI. H.V. KRISHNAMURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR
    SRI. H. P. LEELADHAR, ADVOCATE)


       THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE
JUDGEMENT     &    DECREE    DTD   25.02.2013    PASSED     IN
R.A.NO.68/2011 ON THE FILE OF PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST
TRACK COURT, RAMANAGARA, DISMISSED THE APPEAL AND
CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD 05.04.2010
PASSED IN OS.NO.104/2006 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL
SENIOR    CIVIL   JUDGE,   RAMANAGARA,   I/c    OF   ITINERARY
COURT, MAGADI.


       THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                -3-
                                     NC: 2023:KHC:19532
                                        RSA No. 872 of 2013




                         JUDGMENT

1. This appeal is filed by defendant Nos.1 to 3 seeking

to set-aside the judgment and decree dated 05.04.2010

passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ramanagara

in O.S.No.104/2006 and the judgment and decree dated

25.02.2013 passed by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track

Court, Ramanagara in R.A.No.68/2011 and dismissal of

the suit in O.S.No.104/2006.

2. The appellants are defendant Nos.1 to 3 and the

respondent is the plaintiff.

3. The parties will be referred to by their rankings as

per the Trial Court.

4. The respondent - plaintiff filed a suit against the

appellants / defendant Nos.1 to 3 for the relief of specific

performance of sale agreement dated 17.02.1995 in

respect of the suit schedule properties (two items ie.,

schedule 'A' and 'B') and the said suit in O.S.No.104/2006

came to be decreed directing the defendants to execute

NC: 2023:KHC:19532 RSA No. 872 of 2013

the sale deed in respect of the suit schedule properties in

the name of the plaintiff by receiving the balance sale

consideration. The defendants challenged the said

judgment and decree in R.A.No.68/2011 before the

Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Ramanagara and the

appeal came to be dismissed by judgment and decree

dated 25.02.2013. The appellants / defendants have

challenged the judgment and decree passed by the Trial

Court and the First Appellate Court in this appeal.

5. A compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3

r/w Section 151 of CPC., is filed along with the copies of

identity documents of the parties.

6. Appellant Nos.1 to 3 and the respondent are present.

Appellant Nos.1 to 3 are identified by their counsel, so also

the respondent has been identified by his counsel.

7. The appellant Nos.1 to 3 admit the terms of

compromise as enumerated in the compromise petition, so

NC: 2023:KHC:19532 RSA No. 872 of 2013

also the respondent admitted the terms of compromise

stated in the compromise petition.

8. The terms of compromises reads as under;

"I) The Appellants and Respondent submit that, the appellants have agreed to sell the schedule properties under the agreement of sale dated 26.07.2004 for a sum of Rs.7,26,000/- out of which the appellants are already received advance sale consideration of Rs.2,00,000/- from the Respondent.

II) The Appellants and Respondent submit that, the appellant No.1 is aged lady and appellant No.2 and 3 are having children and suffering from financial problem and further the appellants expressed their difficulties before the Respondent and request the Respondent to pay further amount to clear their financial problems, then the Respondent accept the request of the appellants and agreed to pay further amount of Rs.60,00,000/- as full and final settlement with the following conditions as stated below,

a) The appellants have been unconditionally agreed that they will execute the registered sale deeds in respect of the suit schedule

NC: 2023:KHC:19532 RSA No. 872 of 2013

properties within 6 months from this day in the name of Respondent or his nominees.

b) The appellants have voluntarily agreed that, immediately the appellants have been filed an application before the revenue authorities and get the Khata in their name in respect of land bearing Sy.No.58/4, measuring 0.03 guntas of Kethohalli village, Tavarekere Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, after change of Khata in their names, the appellants have execute the sale deed in the name of Respondent or his nominees within 6 months from this day. [

c) The Respondent have agreed to pay a sum of Rs.40,00,000/- by way of cheques in the name of the appellants and another daughter of C.Venkateshan namely Kavitha.K. equally at the time of executing the registered sale deed in respect of Item No.1 of schedule property in the name of Respondent and further the Respondent have agreed to pay a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- by way of cheques in the name of the appellants at the time of executing the sale deed in respect of Item No.2 schedule property in the name of Respondent and the appellants and another daughter of C.Venkateshan namely Kavitha.K

NC: 2023:KHC:19532 RSA No. 872 of 2013

are agreed to receive the total amount of Rs.60,00,000/- as full and final settle amount.

d) The appellants are voluntarily agreed and undertake that, they will not claim any further amount from the Respondent in respect of schedule properties.

e) The appellants are undertake that, they will not alienate the schedule properties in favour of any third party.

f) The appellants and another daughter of C.Venkateshan namely Kavitha.K or their legal heirs have no manner of right, title, share and interest over the schedule properties and accept the Judgment and decree passed by the Addl. Civil Judge Sr.Dn Ramanagar on 05.04.2010 in O.S.No.104/2006.

5. The Appellants and the Respondent settled the above said dispute as stated above amicably in order to keep the good relationship between the Appellants and the Respondent. This compromise petition is filed with the full consent, knowledge, deliberations and with free will of the Appellants and the Respondent without any coercion, duress, pressure of any quarter's third parties and this compromise petition for the best interest of the Appellants and the Respondent.

NC: 2023:KHC:19532 RSA No. 872 of 2013

6. The Appellants are undertake that, the appellants, their legal heirs have no manner of right, title, share and interest over the other properties mentioned in the schedule properties and further at the time of executing the sale deed another daughter of C.Venkateshan namely Kavitha.K will keep present by appellants and signed in sale deed and further schedule properties are the absolute properties of Respondent.

7. The Appellants and Respondent submit that this Hon'ble Court pleased to record this compromise petition and decree the suit in accordance with law, as per the terms and conditions of this compromise petition and order to return the entire Court fee to the appellant No.1 which was paid at the time of filing the above appeal.

WHEREFORE, the Appellants and Respondent in the above case most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to accept and record the compromise petition stated above and decree the suit in terms of compromise petition in favour of Respondent, in the interest of justice and equity."

9. The terms of compromise are lawful. The parties

present before the Court submit that they have entered

NC: 2023:KHC:19532 RSA No. 872 of 2013

into compromise with their free volition and there is no

force of anybody to enter into a compromise.

10. Hence, this appeal is disposed of in terms of the

compromise entered into between the parties.

11. Draw the decree in terms of the compromise.

12. In Paragraph No.7 of the compromise petition, it is

stated that the entire Court fee has to be returned to

appellant No.1. Appellant Nos.2 and 3 who are present

before the Court submit that they have no objection for