Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Smt Sunanda M Salian vs Mrs Vidyavathi R Salian
2025 Latest Caselaw 11241 Kant

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 11241 Kant
Judgement Date : 12 December, 2025

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Sunanda M Salian vs Mrs Vidyavathi R Salian on 12 December, 2025

                                             -1-
                                                          NC: 2025:KHC:53032
                                                      RSA No. 1389 of 2019


                   HC-KAR




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                       DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

                                          BEFORE

                            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

                   REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1389 OF 2019 (DEC/INJ)

                   BETWEEN:

                      SMT SUNANDA M SALIAN
                      W/O LATE MANIRANJAN R AMIN
                      AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
                      R/AT MANU NILAYA
                      BAPPANADU VILLAGE,
                      MANGALURU TALUK
                      D.K. DISTRICT-574 154.
                                                                ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MARLA M.J, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                      MRS VIDYAVATHI R SALIAN
                      W/O RAGHUNATH S SALIAN
Digitally signed      AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
by PANKAJA S          R/AT MANU NILAYA
Location: HIGH        BAPPANADU VILLAGE,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA             MANGALURU TALUK
                      D.K. DISTRICT
                      NOW RESIDING AT A-402,
                      AMEYA APARTMENTS
                      CHOWGLE NAGARAM SAVARPADA
                      BORIVILLI (E) MUMBAI-66
                                                              ...RESPONDENT
                   (BY SRI. MEGHACHANDRA D.N, ADVOCATE)

                        THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST
                   THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.04.2019 PASSED IN
                   RA NO.56/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDL.DISTRICT AND
                                 -2-
                                               NC: 2025:KHC:53032
                                            RSA No. 1389 of 2019


HC-KAR




SESSIONS    JUDGE,  DAKSHINA    KANNADA, MANGALURU
ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
AND DECREE DATED 22.09.2014 PASSED IN OS NO.35/2012
ON THE FILE THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ACJM., KARKALA.

    THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

                        ORAL JUDGMENT

The vakalath filed by the learned counsel Sri

Meghachandra D.N., for the respondent is taken on record.

2. A compromise petition filed by the learned counsel

appearing on either side under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC along

with an affidavit of both the parties separately is taken on

record. The same reads as under:

"MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 3 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

The Appellant and the Respondent jointly submit as under:

1. It is submitted that, Appellant has preferred the present appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 26.04.2019 passed by the IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, D.K Mangaluru in R.A No.56/2014 wherein First Appellate Court had set aside and reversed the judgment and decree dated 22.09.2014 passed by the senior Civil Judge & ACJM Karkala in O.S No. 35/2014.

NC: 2025:KHC:53032

HC-KAR

2. It is submitted that, the Appellant and the Respondent shall be collectively referred to hereinafter as "PARTIES" for the sake of brevity.

3. It is submitted that, the appellant and respondent are Sister-in-laws by relationship and the dispute had arisen due to some misunderstandings between them, which led to the filing of the suit in O.S No 35/2014 by the Respondent herein. However, the said suit was dismissed by the trial court against which the respondent herein filed R.A No.56/2014. However the First Appellate Court vide Judgment and Decree dated 26.04.2019 had allowed the appeal and consequently allowed the suit.

Therefore the appellant herein who was the defendant in the suit has filed this appeal.

4. Appellant and Respondent due to the close relationship and due to the interference of the family daiva (deity) in the month of May 2025 have settled the dispute involved in the suit. And the respondent herein has let off her claim in the suit.

5. In that view of the matter the Appellant and Respondent after thorough deliberation and mutual consultations have entered into a compromise, and they have decided to settle their disputes amicably as continuation of litigation would cause severe inconvenience to both the Parties.

NOW THE TERMS OF THE COMPROMISE WITNESSTH AS FOLLOWS;

i. The Respondent undertakes to withdraw the claim in the suit and she would not press the execution of judgment and decree dated 26.04.2019 passed by the IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, D.K Mangaluru in R.A NO.56/2014. Therefore the respondent herein in lieu of the compromise arrived agrees to allow the above appeal.

ii. That the compromise entered in to between the parties is valid, legal and the same is not opposed to any law. The above compromise is entered between the

NC: 2025:KHC:53032

HC-KAR

parties out of their free will, without any threat, any force, coercion and undue influence in entering this compromise.

iii. In view of the compromise entered into between the parties, except the terms specified in the instant compromise, there are no other claims against each other. If any claims whatsoever by the Respondent or legal heirs or any one claiming under him shall stand forfeited as per understanding arrived between the parties in this Compromise Petition.

iv. Both Parties herein after thorough deliberation have arrived at the above consensus and have realized the above terms and conditions with free consent, in their free will without any coercion. The above terms and conditions have been placed before the parties individually for verifying and clarification with their respective counsels and only after approval by all the parties and their counsels this MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE is signed by all the parties in the presence of their respective counsels and presented before this Hon'ble Court.

WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to accept the MEMORANDUM of COMPROMISE and set aside the judgment and Decree dated 26.04.2019 passed by the IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, D.K Mangaluru in R.A No.56/2014dated, in the interest of justice and equity."

3. The parties are present through video conferencing

and they have been duly identified by their respective counsel.

They submit that the appeal may be disposed of in terms of the

compromise petition.

NC: 2025:KHC:53032

HC-KAR

4. In the above view of the matter, the appeal is

accordingly disposed of in terms of compromise entered into

between the parties.

5. The judgment and decree dated 26.04.2019 passed

in Regular Appeal No.56/2014 by the Court of IV Addl. District

and Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru is set-aside.

Decree shall be drawn up in terms of compromise.

All pending Interlocutory Application[s] stand disposed of.

SD/-

(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE

HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter