Karnataka High Court

Sri Y S Channarayappa vs Smt Savithramma on 25 April, 2024

Author: S.G.Pandit

Bench: S.G.Pandit

                                                  -1-
                                                          NC: 2024:KHC:16676-DB
                                                          RFA No. 1059 of 2013




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                          DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
                                             PRESENT
                             THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
                                                  AND
                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
                        REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1059 OF 2013 (DEC)

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    SRI Y S CHANNARAYAPPA
                         AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
                         S/O LATE SRI. SUBBAIAH

                         APPELLANT NO.1 IS DEAD
                         THE APPELLANTS NO.2 TO 4 ARE THE
                         LR'S OF THE DECEASED APPELLANT NO.1

                   2.    SMT. KAMALAMMA
                         AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
                         W/O LATE Y.S. CHANNARAYAPPA

                   3.    SRI. Y.C. CHANNAKESHAVA
                         AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
Digitally signed
by A K                   S/O LATE Y.S. CHANNARAYAPPA
CHANDRIKA
Location: HIGH     4.    SRI. Y. C. SUDHAKAR
COURT OF                 AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
KARNATAKA                S/O LATE Y.S. CHANNARAYAPPA

                         ALL ARE R/AT NO.118L,
                         HOSABEEDHI, YELAHANKA TOWN,
                         BANGALORE-560064.

                   5.    SRI Y.C. VISHWAS
                         AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
                         S/O LATE Y.S. CHANNARAYAPPA
                         R/AT NO.11/13, HOSABEEDHI,
                                  -2-
                                             NC: 2024:KHC:16676-DB
                                             RFA No. 1059 of 2013




     YELAHANKA TOWN,
     BANGALORE-560064.
                                                         ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. T.P. VIVEKANANDA, ADV. FOR A2-A5)


AND:

1.   SMT. SAVITHRAMMA
     AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
     W/O LATE Y.S. CHANNARAYAPPA

     RESPONDENT NO.1 IS DEAD
     THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IS THE LR'S OF
     THE DECEASED RESPONDENT NO.1

2.   SMT. Y. C. MANJU
     AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
     D/O LATE Y.S. CHANNARAYAPPA

     BOTH ARE R/AT NO.1312,
     2ND MAIN, GANDHINAGAR,
     YELAHANKA TOWN,
     BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-560064.
                                                      ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. RAJESHWARI M., ADV. FOR
 SRI R.B. SADASIVAPPA, ADV. FOR C/R2)


       THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.03.2013 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.7062/2000 ON THE FILE OF XLIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE,            PARTLY DECREEING AND
PARTLY    DISMISSING     THE   SUIT    FILED    FOR    DECLARATION,
PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.


       THIS   APPEAL,   COMING    ON   FOR     ORDERS,    THIS   DAY,
S.G.PANDIT J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                  -3-
                                            NC: 2024:KHC:16676-DB
                                             RFA No. 1059 of 2013




                          JUDGMENT

Appellants as well as sole respondent are present

before the Court and they are identified by their learned

counsel i.e., Sri.T.P.Vivekananda and learned counsel

Smt.Rajeshhwari.M., for Sri.R.B.Sadasivappa, learned

counsel for respondent.

2. The instant appeal is against the judgment and

decree dated 26.03.2013 in O.S.No.7062/2000 on the file

of the XLIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at

Bengaluru (CCH-44), by which suit of the plaintiffs for

partition is partly decreed and partly dismissed.

3. Today, parties to the proceedings through their

learned counsel are presented memorandum of

compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC.

Relevant portion of the compromise petition i.e.,

paragraph 5 reads as under:

"5. The above appeal has been admitted on 28.01.2019. During the pendency of the above appeal, with the intervention of friends, relatives and well-wishers, the appellants and the

NC: 2024:KHC:16676-DB

respondent No.2 have decided to amicably settle the dispute in order to give a quietus to the litigation and to have a cordial relationship in the family. Accordingly, the present Compromise Petition is being filed agreeing for allotment of share in the schedule properties as follows:

i) Item Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 17 of the suit schedule properties are allotted to the exclusive share of the second respondent Shri Y.C.Manju.

ii) In Item No. 7, 1 acre 36 guntas out of 3.19 acres in Sy.No.46 of Panditapura Village, Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk which is Item No.7 of the suit schedule property is allotted to the share of the second respondent which is shown in Green colour in the sketch attached to this compromise petition to the exclusive share of the second respondent Smt.Y.C.Manju

iii) Item Nos. 1, 3, 9, 10, 11, 16, 18, 19, 20,21,22,23 and 24 are allotted to the share of appellant Nos. 2 to 5 together.

iv) In Item No. 7, 1 acre 23 guntas out of 3.19 acres in Sy.No.46 of Panditapura Village, Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk which is Item No.7 of the suit schedule property is

NC: 2024:KHC:16676-DB

together which is shown in Blue colour in the attached sketch.

v) The appellant Nos. 2 to 5 have relinquished all their right, title and interest in the properties allotted to the exclusive share of respondent No.2. Similarly, the respondent No.2 relinquished all his right, title and interest in the properties allotted to the share of appellant Nos. 2 to 5.

vi) Both the parties have declared that other than the suit schedule properties, there are no other properties left by Y.S.Channarayappa and Y.S. Channappa being joint family properties. Even if there are any properties standing in the name Y.S.Channarayappa other than the schedule properties, the Respondent No.2 has no claim over the same.

vii) Both the parties agree and accept that Item No.11 of the suit schedule property which has been sold to third party shall not be re-

nor the respondent No.2 have any objections to the sale already made;

NC: 2024:KHC:16676-DB

viii) In the light of the present compromise, the Respondent No.2 shall withdraw the FDP No.69/2013 pending before the City Civil Court.

ix) Both the parties hereby declare that they do not have any claim against each other over any of the properties acquired by the appellant Nos. 2 to 5 and the respondent No.2 in their individual capacity.

x) Both the parties declare that there are no other pending litigation before any Court of Law or before the other Statutory Authorities, Tribunals except the one mentioned herein below. If there are any such proceedings, they have undertaken to withdraw the same unconditionally.

xi) Appellants No.2 to 5 have agreed to prosecute and defend the suit in OS No.202/2021 pending before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Devahanahalli concerning portion of item No.7 of the schedule property which is allotted to them. However, there is no dispute/litigation in respect of the portion of the land allotted in favour of Respondent No.2 in the said item. In the event if Respondent No.2 is unable to sell the portion

NC: 2024:KHC:16676-DB

of item No.7 allotted to her share for any reason, the appellants No.2 to 5 would purchase the same at the prevailing market value.

xii) The appellants No. 2 to 5 have undertaken not to re-open O.S No.474/2013 which was filed against their father with respect to site No. 31 and 32 measuring East to West 40 Feet and North to South 60 Feet, Katha No. 49/31/32, situated at Allalsandra Yelahanka, Bangalore North Taluk and further declare that, they have no manner of right, title and interest over the said property.

xiii) The appellants No. 2 to 5 have no objection for taking return of the documents from the City Civil Court in OS No.7062/2000 in respect of the properties allotted to the share of Respondent No.2, similarly, the Respondent No.2 has objection for the appellants No.2 to 5 taking return of the documents in the above suit in respect of the properties allotted to their share. Both the parties undertakes to exchange any other documents in their respective custody based on the allotment of share in the present compromise.

NC: 2024:KHC:16676-DB

xiv) This compromise is full and final. Both the parties are not entitle to seek for re-opening of partition on any grounds whatsoever. The respondent No.2 has no claim whatsoever in respect of any other properties if any standing in the name of late. Y.S.Channarayappa.

xv) The appellants No.2 to 5 and Respondent No.2 are entitle to seek change/transfer of katha/revenue entries(including Phodi and durasth) to their names on the basis of this compromise in respect of the properties allotted to their respective shares.

xvi) The appellants No.2 to 5 and the respondent No.2 have agreed to the above terms and decided to file this Compromise Petition on their own volition without there being any compulsion, coercion, misrepresentation, etc., and the compromise entered into by the parties is legal and equitable."

4. On going through the compromise petition, we

are satisfied with the terms of the compromise and the

same is in accordance with law. The parties admit the

terms of the compromise.

NC: 2024:KHC:16676-DB

5. In terms of the compromise petition, appeal

stands disposed of by modifying the judgment and decree

dated 26.03.2023 in O.S.No.7062/2000 on the file of the

XLIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru

(CCH-44).

6. Registry is directed to modify the decree in

terms of the compromise petition.