Karnataka High Court
Sri S Mohan vs Sri S Vasu on 14 November, 2024
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:46338
RFA No. 1740 of 2018
C/W RFA No. 1739 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1740 OF 2018 (PAR-)
C/W
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1739 OF 2018
IN RFA No. 1740/2018
BETWEEN:
SRI. S. VASU
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
S/O LATE S. R. SRINIVASA RAO,
R/AT NO.237-5/1, 2ND CROSS,
HANUMANTHANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 019.
Digitally ...APPELLANT
signed by
VEDAVATHI (BY SRI. PRASANNA V R., ADVOCATE)
AK
Location: AND:
High Court
of Karnataka
1. SRI. S. MOHAN
S/O LATE S. R. SRINIVASA RAO,
R/AT NO.37-42,
COMPLAINTO CHAYAPATHY VENKATESH,
MADHUSHRI RESIDENCY,
11TH MAIN ROAD,
PADMANABHANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 070.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:46338
RFA No. 1740 of 2018
C/W RFA No. 1739 of 2018
2. SMT. MANJULA VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
W/O N. VENKATESH,
R/A NO.32065, 2ND FLOOR,
BLOCK-3, JANAPRIYA EUTOPIA,
HYDERGUDA, ATTAPUR ROAD,
HYDERABAD - 500 048.
3. SMT. DR. HEMA M S
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
W/O S. MOHAN,
D/O SRI. MADAPUR SHESHACHALA,
R/A NO.286/10, 3RD MAIN ROAD,
N R COLONY,
BANGALORE -560 019.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SOMANATH H., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. H. R. MANJUNATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.04.2018
PASSED IN O.S.NO.8092/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE XV
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE, BANGALORE,
DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE
POSSESSION.
IN RFA NO. 1739/2018
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. S. MOHAN
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
S/O LATE S. R. SRINIVASA RAO,
R/AT NO.37-42, COMPLAINTO CHAYAPATHY
VENKATESH,
MADHUSHRI RESIDENCY,
11TH MAIN ROAD,
PADMANABHANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 070.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:46338
RFA No. 1740 of 2018
C/W RFA No. 1739 of 2018
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. DIVYA K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. S. VASU
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
S/O LATE S. R. SRINIVASA RAO,
R/AT 237, 5/1, 2ND CROSS,
HANUMANTHANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 019.
2. SMT. MANJULA VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
W/O N. VENKATESH,
R/AT NO.32065, 2ND FLOOR,
3RD BLOCK, JANAPRIYA EUTOPIA,
HYDERGUDA, ATTAPUR ROAD,
HYDERABAD - 500 048.
3. DR. HEMA M. S.
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
W/O S. MOHAN,
D/O SRI. MADAPUR SHESHACHALA,
R/AT NO.286/10,
3RD MAIN ROAD, N.R.COLONY,
BANGALORE - 560 019.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRASANNA V R., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. ANIL KUMAR M V., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. H. R. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS RFA IS FILED U/S.96 OF CPC, 1908 AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED: 27.04.2018 PASSED IN
OS.NO.8092/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE XV ADDL.CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE DECREEING
THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:46338
RFA No. 1740 of 2018
C/W RFA No. 1739 of 2018
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
RFA No.1740/2018 is filed by the appellant/plaintiff No.1
and RFA No.1739/2018 filed by the appellant/defendant No.1
by challenging the judgment and decree passed by XV Addl.
City Civil and Sessions Judge CCH-3, in OS.No.8092/2010,
dated 27.04.2018, for having decreeing the suit of the 1st
respondent/plaintiff by granting 1/3rd share in the suit schedule
property.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the
parties.
3. The appellant in RFA No.1739/2018 was the 1st
defendant, and the appellant in RFA No.1740/2018 is the
plaintiff No.1.
4. Having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the
parties, perused the records.
5. During the pendency of the appeal both the defendants
and plaintiffs i.e., appellant and respondent Nos. 1 to 3
NC: 2024:KHC:46338
appeared before the court and filed joint compromise
application. It is submitted by the learned counsels appearing
in both cases, though the trial court decreed the suit of the
plaintiff by granting 1/3rd share but the suit schedule property
is a house where the 3rd defendant -Hema M.S., who is said to
be the wife of the Mohan is in possession, and the 1st
defendant is not in possession, the 2nd defendant is the sister
of the plaintiff as well as 1st defendant. Now the dispute
between the 1st and 3rd defendant has been settled between
them in the matrimonial case and the 3rd defendant agreed to
hand over the possession back to the 1st defendant.
6. The plaintiff, defendant Nos.1 to 3 are present. And
defendant No.2 submits that she is agreeing for the terms of
the compromise and she is handing over the possession back to
the 1st defendant as per settlement in matrimonial case.
7. The submission of the learned counsel of the
respondent placed on record. And the counsel also submits
they will work out the remedy between the plaintiff and 1st and
2nd defendant in the final decree proceedings.
8. Submission is placed on record.
NC: 2024:KHC:46338
9. Accordingly, the compromise is accepted in RFA
1739/2018.
10. The RFA No. 1739/2018 is disposed off in terms of
the compromise.
11. Accordingly, the appeal in RFA No.1740/2018 also
disposed off in view of the compromise between the parties in
RFA.No. 1739/2018.
12. Draw the decree accordingly.
13. Permitted to take back the original documents from
the Trial Court.
Sd/-
(K.NATARAJAN)
JUDGE
SRK
CT:SK
