Karnataka High Court
H.Sreenivasa Reddy S/O. Hulukal Hanuma ... vs P.Bheemareddy S/O. P Mallareddy on 19 August, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10450
RFA No. 100505 of 2018
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100505 OF 2018 (SP-)
BETWEEN:
H. SREENIVASA REDDY
S/O. HULUKAL HANUMA REDDY
AGED 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST
AND MERCHANT, R/O. DOOR NO.5,
SBI COLONY, MOKA ROAD,
W.NO.21, OLD W.NO.18, BALLARI,
AND PROPRIETOR OF
M/S. VENKATESHWARA AGRO
CHEMICALS, NO.3, HAVINAL BASANNA
COMPLEX, K.C ROAD, BALLARI-583101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. K.L. PATIL, ADV)
AND:
P. BHEEMAREDDY S/O. P. MALLAREDDY
AGED 55 YEARS, WORKING IN JSW
STEELS, R/O. DOOR NO.159/5D,
TAHASILDAR COMPOUND, OPP: NCC OFFICE,
CANTONMENT, BALLARI-583101.
...RESPONDENT
Digitally signed
(BY SRIYUTHS. V.M. SHEELVANT AND
by
MOHANKUMAR
MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR
B SHELAR
Date:
VINAY S. KOUJALAGI, ADVS FOR RESPONDENT)
2025.08.22
12:56:02 +0530
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DTD:31.10.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.
173/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
BALLARI, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR SPECIFIC
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10450
RFA No. 100505 of 2018
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)
The appellant and respondent along with their
respective counsel are present before this court. The
parties are identified by their respective counsel.
2. The appellant and the respondent have
amicably settled their dispute, and filed the compromise
petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC, which reads
as follows.
In this the Appellant and Respondent most
respectfully submit as under;
1. It is submitted that the Plaintiff/Respondent herein
had filed suit bearing O.S. No. 173/2011 on the
file of 1st Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Ballari seeking
relief of specific performance of contract to
execute the sale deed in respect of property
cents situated at Kakkabevinahalli village of Tq. &
Dist, Ballari.
2. It is submitted that the Court below by its
Judgment and Decree dated: 31/10/2018 passed
by 1st Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Ballari, in O.S. No.
173/2011, thereby decreeing the Suit of plaintiff,
Being aggrieved by the said Judgment & Decree
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10450
HC-KAR
dated 31/10/2018 the Defendant Appellant
preferred this appeal.
3. The parties to the dispute have amicably settled
their dispute at the instance of elders of the family
and village in the following terms.
(1) Both the parties have no objection to dismiss
the suit filed by respondent herein/plaintiff.
(ii) It is submitted that in view of the compromise
the plaintiff/Respondent wish to withdraw the suit
and his claim over the suit property. Further he
will not claim any right over the property in future.
Further, either of the parties to the appeal have no
other claim over each other whatsoever.
4. It is submitted that, in view of the compromise the
Hon'ble Court be directed the Registry of this
Hon'ble Court to refund the entire court fee paid
by the Appellant herein.
5. Both the parties have no objection to draw the
decree accordingly.
Wherefore, under these circumstances the Hon'ble
Court may kindly be dismiss O.S. No. 173/2011on the
file of 1st Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Ballari and order to
draw a Decree in terms of compromise, in the interest of
justice and equity.
3. The contents of the compromise petition are
read over and explained to the parties in the Kannada
language, known to them, and they have accepted the
terms and conditions of the compromise petition. The
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10450
HC-KAR
parties submit that the appeal may be disposed of, in
terms of the compromise petition. There is no legal
impediment in accepting the compromise petition, and the
contents of the compromise petition are not contrary to
public policy.
4. The compromise petition is placed on record.
5. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed off, in terms
of the compromise petition.
6. The office is directed to draw the decree, in
terms of the compromise petition.
7. The office is directed to refund the court fee, in
favour of the appellant, in terms of Section 66 of the
Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958.
8. In view of disposal of the appeal, pending I.A's
if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI)
JUDGE
MBS
CT: BSB
