Karnataka High Court
M Krishnaiah vs Smt Jahyalakshmi on 5 February, 2024
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:4814
RSA No. 119 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.119 OF 2009 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
1. M. KRISHNAIAH
SINCE DEAD BY LRS.
1(a). T. REDDAMMA
W/O LATE M. KRISHNAIAH
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
R/AT THOTALAPALYA,
MULBAGAL - 563 131.
1(b). K. MANJUNATH
S/O LATE M. KRISHNAIAH
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT KURBARAPALYA RIGHT SIDE,
N.T. ROAD,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201.
Digitally signed 1(c). K. BHAGYALAKSHMI
by SHARANYA T
Location: HIGH
W/O LATE T.M. MANJUNATHA
COURT OF AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
KARNATAKA R/AT THOTALAPALYA,
MULBAGAL-563 131.
1(d). K. BHUVANESWARI
W/O LATE K.N. VENKATACHALAPATHY
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/AT THOTALAPALYA,
MULBAGAL - 563 131.
1(e). K. TEJAKUMAR
S/O LATE M. KRISHNAIAH
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:4814
RSA No. 119 of 2009
R/AT THOTALAPALYA
MULBAGAL - 563 131.
2. L. VIJAYALAKSHMI
SINCE DEAD BY LRS.
(APPELLANTS 3 TO 5)
3. M.L. PADMANABHA
S/O LATE LAKSHMINARAYAN
AGE: MAJOR.
4. M.L. SATHYANARANAYA
S/O LATE LAKSHMINARAYAN
AGE: MAJOR.
5. M.L. PURUSHOTHAMA
S/O LATE LAKSHMINARAYAN
AGE: MAJOR.
APPELLANTS NO.3 TO 5 ARE
LRS. OF DECEASED APPELLANT NO.2.
APPELLANTS 3 TO R-5 ARE
R/AT THOTALAPALYA,
MULABAGAL TOWN,
MULABAGAL,
KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 131.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. C. VAMSHI KRISHNA, ADVOCATE
FOR LRS. OF APPELLANT 1(a) TO 1(e) AND 3 TO 5)
AND:
1. JAYALAKSHMI
SINCE DEAD BY LRS.
1(a). TUNGA CHANDRASHEKAR
S/O LATE HOTEL TUNGA RANGAPPA
AGE: MAJOR
R/AT AVALAVADI SANDUR,
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:4814
RSA No. 119 of 2009
NAGAPALYAM,
PUNGANOOR,
CHITTOR DISTRICT,
ANDHRA PRADESH - 517 247.
1(b). TUNGA MANJUNATH
S/O LATE HOTEL TUNGA RANGAPPA
AGE: MAJOR
C/O TUNGA LODGE,
BEHIND OLD BUS STAND,
PUNGANOOR,
CHITTOR DISTRICT,
ANDHRA PRADESH - 517 247.
1(c). MRS. RAJESHWARI
W/O LATE RAMANJALU,
POLICE DEPARTMENT
AGE: MAJOR
R/AT SATYA APARTMENT,
SHYAM NAGAR, MASAB TANK,
HYDERABAD,
TELANGANA - 500 028.
2. PADMAVATHAMMA
SINCE DEAD BY LRS.
2(a). D.K. SARALA
SINCE DEAD BY LRS.
2(a)(i). BRIJESH B.S.
S/O LATE SHIV KUMAR
AGE: MAJOR.
2(a)(ii) PRANATHI B.S.
D/O LATE SHIV KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS
(REP. BY HER GUARDIAN/BROTHER
BRIJESH B.S.-RESPONDENT NO.2(a)(i).
RESPONDENTS 2(a)(i) AND 2(a)(ii) ARE
R/AT NO.31, THIRUMADHESWARA,
II FLOOR, 20TH 'B' MAIN,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:4814
RSA No. 119 of 2009
S.M.S. LAYOUT, J.P. NAGAR 5TH PHASE,
BENGALURU - 560 076.
2(b). MR. D.K. KUMAR
S/O LATE KRISHNAIAH
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/AT NO.80, MANJUNATH NILAYA,
20TH 'B' MAIN,
NEAR NILAKANTESHWARA PROVISION STORE,
S.M.S. LAYOUT,
J.P. NAGAR 5TH PHASE,
BENGALURU - 560 076.
2(c). SMT. D.K. SUJATHA
W/O SRINATH
AGED: MAJOR
R/AT NO.31, THIRUMADHESWARA,
2ND FLOOR, 20TH 'B' MAIN,
S.M.S. LAYOUT,
J.P. NAGAR 5TH PHASE,
BENGALURU - 560 076.
3. SMT. VIMALA
W/O LATE VIJAYA MOHAN
AGE: MAJOR
R/O NO.566, 10TH MAIN
6TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 010.
4. SRINIVAS
S/O. LATE CHANGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT THOTADAPALYA,
MULABAGAL TOWN,
MULABAGAL,
KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 131.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M. NARAYANA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR
R1(a) TO (c), R-2(b) AND (c);
SRI. D. LAXMAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-3;
SRI. D. RAGHU PRAKASH BABU, ADVOCATE FOR
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:4814
RSA No. 119 of 2009
R1(b), R-2(a)(i) AND R-2(a) (ii);
V/O DATED 27.08.2010, NOTICE TO R4 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 100 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE AGAINST THE
JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 04TH NOVEMBER, 2008
PASSED IN REGULAR APPEAL NO.18 OF 2008 ON THE FILE OF
THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, KOLAR, DISMISSING THE
APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE
DATED 02ND JANUARY, 2008 PASSED IN ORIGIANAL SUIT
NO.229 OF 2002 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL CIVIL
JUDGE (SR.DN.) C/C III ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.),
KOLAR, ITINERATING AT MULBAGAL.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Compromise petition is filed by the parties under Order
XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 94 and 151 of the Civil
Procedure Code.
2. Appellants and respondents except respondent No.4
are present before the Court and they have been identified by
their respective counsels.
3. Respondent No.4 is not present before the Court and
in the compromise petition specifically at Paragraph 7, parties
have stated that the respondent No.4 left the house during the
NC: 2024:KHC:4814
year 1987 and his whereabouts are not known to them and in
the event, if the respondent No.4 or his legal heirs return, they
are ready to give the share entitled to the respondent No.4.
4. This Court explained the terms of the compromise
petition to the parties and they have accepted the same.
Hence, compromise petition is accepted.
5. Registry is directed to draw the decree in terms of the
compromise petition.
Sd/-
JUDGE
ARK
