Karnataka High Court
Sri B E Puttaswamy vs Sri J S Shivakumar on 28 June, 2024
Author: Ravi V Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:24259
RFA No. 1305 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1305 OF 2009 (MON)
BETWEEN:
SRI. B.E. PUTTASWAMY,
AGED 51 YEARS,
S/O LATE B.R.EREGOWDA,
R/AT JANEKERE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI,
SAKALESHPUR TALUK.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI N. JAGADISH BALIGA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI.J.S. SHIVAKUMAR,
(SINCE DECEASED BY LRS.,)
AGED 53 YEARS,
Digitally signed by S/O SRI. SUBBEGOWDA,
GEETHAKUMARI R/AT JANEKERE VILLAGE,
PARLATTAYA S KASABA HOBLI,
Location: High SAKALESHPUR TALUK).
Court of Karnataka
1(a) MRS.PUSHPA,
W/O LATE J.S.SHIVAKUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
1(b) PRAJITHA J.S.,
S/O LATE J.S.SHIVAKUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:24259
RFA No. 1305 of 2009
1(c) MANJUSHREE H.R.,
W/O LATE J.S.PRAJWAL,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
1(d) MASTER VISHRUTH PATIL,
S/O LATE J.S.PRAJWAL,
AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS,
REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER
MANJUSHREE H.R.,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
JANAKERE VILLAGE, AREKERE POST,
KASABA HOBLI,
SAKALESHPUR TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 134.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, ADVOCATE)
THIS RFA IS FILED U/S 96(1) R/W ORDER XLI RULE 1 OF
CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.9.2009
PASSED IN O.S.NO.41/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE
(SR.DN) SAKALESHPURA, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR
RECOVERY OF MONEY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This is an appeal filed against judgment and decree dated
19.09.2009 in O.S.no.41/2007 passed by Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.)
at Sakaleshpur, wherein suit was decreed for sum of
Rs.8,00,000/- with interest at 6% p.a.
NC: 2024:KHC:24259
2. It is stated that during pendency of appeal, original
plaintiff died, but legal representatives were already on record.
Further, respondent no.1(a) i.e. Smt.Pushpa wife of J.S.
Shivakumar along with other legal representatives had
executed General Power of Attorney(GPA) in favour of
Sri J.S.Mohan insofar as present appeal is concerned. It is
submitted that parties have entered into compromise, terms of
which are as follows:
"i) That this appeal is preferred challenging judgment and
decree dated 19.09.2009 in O.S.no.41/2007 on file of
Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Sakaleshpur, decreeing suit for
Rs.8,00,000/- directing appellant to pay same to
respondent along with interest at 6% per annum from
date of suit with costs.
ii) That at time of admission of this appeal, this Court was
pleased to direct appellant to deposit Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rupees Two Lakhs only) before this Court within a period
of six weeks. This Court further directed to deposit said
amount in the then ING Vysya Bank Limited, High Court
Extension Counter, Bengaluru. It is further directed that
successful party is entitled for withdrawal of said amount
with interest accrued thereon. As per direction, appellant
deposited amount before this Court on 22.01.200 and on
deposit, amount is been deposited in ING Vysya Bank.
This appeal is admitted on 27.03.2012.
NC: 2024:KHC:24259
iii) That during pendency of this appeal, original
respondent expired and his legal representatives are been
brought on record.
iv) That after intervention of Court, well wishers, friends
and relatives, matter is settled out of Court and parties
entered in compromise and settlement. This compromise
is entered by parties by freewill and by understanding
consequences thereof.
v) That in pursuance of compromise, legal representatives
of original respondents no.1 to 4 are entitled for amount
in deposit made by appellant in pursuance of interim
order passed by this Court along with accrued interest.
Entire amount in deposit should be payable to legal
representatives of respondent towards their full and final
claim in respect of decree. The parties declare that they
have no claim against each other.
vi) That appellant paid Court fee of Rs.74,800/- at time of
filing of this appeal. Since matter is compromised,
appellant is entitled for refund of permissible Court fee
and prayed accordingly."
3. Parties and GPA holder are present and identified by
their respective counsels. On interaction, they have stated that
they have entered into compromise voluntarily without threat
or coercion or inducement from anyone and that terms of
compromise petition are read over and explained to them and
after understanding same, they have signed it.
NC: 2024:KHC:24259
4. Perused terms of compromise petition. They appear to
be lawful. As such, there is no impediment for this Court to
accept compromise petition. Consequently, following:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed in terms of compromise petition.
(ii) To above extent, judgment and decree of trial
Court is modified.
(iii) Registry to draw decree incorporating terms of
compromise petition.
(iv) Since appeal is disposed of as per settlement,
appellant would be entitled for refund of
admissible Court fee.
Amount in deposit is ordered to be paid to
respondents along with interest accrued if any,
on said amount.
Sd/-
JUDGE
MKM
