Karnataka High Court
Sri. Vasavi Education Trust (R) vs M Sharadamma on 29 May, 2024
Author: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
Bench: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:18185
RFA No. 955 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 955 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
SRI VASAVI EDUCATION TRUST (R)
KALYA GATE, MAGADI TOWN
REPT. BY ITS PRESIDENT
S.G.RAMESH GUPTA
S/O LATE GOPALAKRISHNA SETTEE
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI SARAVANA S, ADV.)
AND:
1. M. SHARADAMMA
W/O M R RAMACHANDRA,
AGED 64 YEARS
R/O DOOR NO.190, 3RD CROSS
OPP. OPPOSITE VANI VIDYA
Digitally signed
by R MANDIR SCHOOL, 40 FEET ROAD
HEMALATHA KEMPEGOWDA NAGAR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF MAGADI MAIN ROAD
KARNATAKA VISHWA NEEDAM POST
BANGALORE - 560 009.
2. R. RENUKA
W/O H.B. PALAKSHA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/O DOOR NO.1676
SRI RANGADAMA NILAYA
UTTARA BADAVANE
HASSAN - 573 201.
3. RAVAMMA
W/O KEMPATHIMMAIAH
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:18185
RFA No. 955 of 2020
AGED 79 YEARS
R/O LAKSHMANAPPA LAYOUT
BEHIND KEB, SUBHASHNAGAR
NELAMANAGALA
BANGALORE - 562 123.
4. JAYAMMA (RICE MERCHANT)
W/O LATE REVANNA
AGED 71 YEARS
R/O DOOR NO.1264
GANIGARA BEEDI
MAGADI TOWN
RAMANAGAR - 562 120.
5. RAMESH
S/O LATE REVANNA
AGED 51 YEARS
R/O DOOR NO.1264
GANIGARA BEEDI
MAGADI TOWN
RAMANAGAR - 562 120.
6. SMT. PADMAVATHAMMA
W/O VENKARAMAIAH
MAJOR
R/O KALYA GATE
MAGADI TOWN
RAMANAGAR - 562 120.
7. MAHALINGAIAH
S/O YANJARAPPA
MAJOR
R/O KALYA GATE
MAGADI TOWN
RAMANAGAR - 562 120.
8. B.S. RAGAVENDRA
S/O SEETHARAMAIH
AGED 51 YEARS
R/O KALYA GATE
MAGADI TOWN
RAMANAGAR - 562 120.
9. SMT. SARASWATHI BAI
W/O LATE M R SATAVAJIRAO
MAJOR
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:18185
RFA No. 955 of 2020
R/O KALYA GATE
MAGADI TOWN
RAMANAGAR - 562 120.
10. SMT. PARVATHAMMA
W/O M S SRINIVASA
AGE 43 YEARS
R/O BEHIND NIRMALA THIATOR
KALYA GATE, MAGADI TOWN
RAMANAGAR - 562 120.
11. B.H. BYRAIH
S/O LATE ANGADI BYURAPPA
AGED 50 YEARS
R/O MATTA VILLAGE
MADABAL HOBLI
MAGADI TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL
DISTRICT - 561 201.
12. SRI A.P. NAGENDRA BABU
S/O LATE PUTTARANGASHETT
AGED 53 YEARS
R/O NO.881/815, MAIN ROAD
MAGADI TOWN, RAMANAGAR - 562 120.
13. SRI C. NARASAIAH
S/O CHANNAIAH ALIAS CHANNAPPA
AGED 46 YEARS
R/O MATADA PALYA
AGALAKATTE POST, KASABA HOBLI
MAGADI TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI YATHIRAJ, ADV., FOR R-1 & R-2;
SRI P.M. SIDDAMALLAPPA, ADV., FOR R-3;
SRI H.R. SUNJEEVE GOWDA, ADV., FOR R-4 & R-5;
R-6, R-7, R-8, R-10, R-12 R-13 ARE SERVED
AND UNREPRESENTED; V/O DATED 23.04.2024
SRI M VINOD UNDERTAKE TO FILE V/C FOR R-11))
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER XLI RULE
1 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.11.2019
PASSED IN O.S.NO.474/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC, MAGADI, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION
AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:18185
RFA No. 955 of 2020
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. Learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel
for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submit that appellant and
respondent Nos.1 and 2 have jointly filed a compromise
petition stating that the matter is settled between them.
2. Appellant and respondent Nos.1 and 2 are present before
the Court. Upon enquiry, the appellant and respondent Nos.1
and 2 have stated that they have settled the matter amicably
on their own will and voluntarily without any coercion or
influence on them and hence, request to record the
compromise between them with respect to 'B' schedule
property.
3. It is termed in the compromise petition that the appellant
has paid Rs.40 lakhs each to respondent Nos.1 and 2 through
Demand Drafts as in detail described in the compromise
petition in paragraph No.5.
4. Today the appellant has handed over the Demand Drafts
for Rs.40 lakhs each to respondent Nos.1 and 2 and respondent
NC: 2024:KHC:18185
Nos.1 and 2 have acknowledged receipt of Demand Draft in the
presence of their advocates.
5. In terms of this Compromise Petition, appeal is disposed
of insofar as between appellant and respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Insofar as the appeal between the appellant and other
respondents, the appeal shall continue.
6. Draw decree in terms of compromise petition between
appellant and respondent Nos.1 and 2. Compromise Petition
shall be part and parcel of the decree drawn in respect of the
appellant and respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DN
