Karnataka High Court
Sri. N.S. Gangadhara vs Smt. Kempamma on 23 February, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:7633
RFA No. 1307 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1307 OF 2015 (SP)
BETWEEN:
SRI. N.S. GANGADHARA,
S/O N.S. SHIVARUDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT NO. KOTE BEEDI,
NELAMANGALA TOWN,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. G. CHANDRASHEKHARAIAH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by 1. SMT. KEMPAMMA,
ANNAPURNA G W/O LATE BETTAIAH,
Location: High AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
Court of
Karnataka
2. SRI. K.B. GANGADHAR,
S/O LATE BETTAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
3. SRI. K.B. KUMAR,
SINCE DEAD BY LRS,
3(A). SMT. BHAVYA S,
W/O LATE KUMAR K.B,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS.
3(B). KUM. SHILPA,
D/O LATE KUMAR K.B,
AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS,
3(C). KUM. GNANA,
D/O LATE KUMAR K.B,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:7633
RFA No. 1307 of 2015
AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS,
THE RESPONDENTS 3(A) TO (C)
ARE RESIDING AT NO.14,
HI TEA LAYOUT, ARISHINAKUNTE,
NELAMANGALA TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123.
4. SMT. RATHNAMMA,
DEAD BY HER LRS,
4(A). SMT. CHAITHRA,
D/O LATE SMT. RATHNAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/OFF ARISHINKUNTE VILLAGE,
DASANAPURA HOBLI,
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. THIMMAIAH K.H, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 AND
ALSO FOR R2, R3(A TO C) AND R4(A))
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC., AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.08.2015 PASSED IN
O.S NO.867/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
NELAMANGALA, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC
PERFORMANCE.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellant and the learned
counsel for the respondents and also appellant and
respondent Nos.1, 2, 3(a) and 4(a) are present.
NC: 2024:KHC:7633
2. Learned counsel for both the parties have filed
Compromise Petition dated 23.02.2024 under Order 23
Rule 3 of CPC whereby the respondents herein have
agreed to sell the suit schedule property to the appellant
at a revised price. The appellant, who is the plaintiff, had
filed a suit for specific performance, which came to be
dismissed by the Trial Court with a direction to refund the
advance amount paid by the plaintiff to the defendants.
3. Now by way of this Compromise Petition, the
defendants have agreed to sell the suit schedule property
and acknowledges the contents of Compromise Petition.
4. Respondent No.1 acknowledges receipt of sum
of Rs.11,50,000/- vide cheque No.002212 dated
19.02.2024 and a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- vide cheque
No.002213 dated 19.05.2024, drawn on Veerashaiva Co-
operative Bank Nelamangala Branch, respectively.
Respondent No.2 acknowledges receipt of Rs.7,00,000/-
by way of cash. Respondent No.3(a) acknowledges receipt
of sum of Rs.11,50,000/- by way of cheque No.002214,
NC: 2024:KHC:7633
dated 19.02.2024 and a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- by way of
cheque No.002215 dated 19.05.2024 drawn on the
Veerashaiva Co-operative Bank, Nelamangara Branch
respectively and Respondent No.4(a) acknowledges receipt
of Rs.11,50,000/- by way of cheque No.002216 dated
19.02.2024 and a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- by way of cheque
No.002217, dated 19.05.2024 drawn on the Veerashaiva
Co-operative Bank, Nelamangala Branch. The appellant
has stated before this Court that there are sufficient funds
in his account to honor the cheques issued.
5. Having satisfied that the parties have settled
the matter amicably and having entered into the
compromise, the same deserves to be accepted. Hence
the following:
ORDER
The appeal is allowed and impugned judgment and
decree passed by the Trial Court is set aside.
The suit is disposed of in terms and conditions set
out in the Compromise Petition.
NC: 2024:KHC:7633
Draw decree accordingly.
Court fee paid on this appeal shall be refunded to the
appellant.
The appellant has undertaken to pay balance sale
consideration amount as mentioned in the Compromise
Petition at the time of the registration of the sale deed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
GPG
CT: BHK
