Karnataka High Court
Sri E U Somanna vs Smt E U Ponnamma on 6 January, 2025
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:360
RSA No. 1719 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1719 OF 2016 (PAR-)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. E. U. SOMANNA
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
S/O LATE E.A.UTHAIAH,
R/AT KODAMBUR VILLAGE,
MURNAD POST,
MADIKERI TALUK,
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 252.
2. SRI. E. U. POONACHA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
S/O LATE E.A.UTHAIAH,
R/AT KODAMBUR VILLAGE,
MURNAD POST,
Digitally signed by MADIKERI TALUK,
VEDAVATHI A K
Location: High KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 252.
Court of
Karnataka ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. M.D.RAGHUNATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. E. U. PONNAMMA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
W/O LATE E.A.UTHAIAH,
R/AT KODAMBUR VILLAGE,
MURNAD POST,
MADIKERI TALUK,
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 252.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:360
RSA No. 1719 of 2016
2. SRI. E. U. VIJAYA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
S/O LATE UTHAIAH,
R/AT KODAMBUR VILLAGE,
MURNAD POST,
MADIKERI TALUK,
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 252.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.07.2016 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.72/2012 ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE,
KODAGU, MADIKERI, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.07.2012
PASSED IN O.S.NO.115/2005 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE, MADIKERI.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR REPORTING
SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN
AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:360
RSA No. 1719 of 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT
This second appeal is filed by the plaintiff for setting aside
the judgment of dismissal of the suit passed by the first
appellate court in R.A.No.72/2012 for having reversing the
judgment and decree passed in favour of the plaintiff by the
Trial Court in O.S.No.115/2005 dated 19.07.2012.
2. The appellants are the plaintiff and respondents are
the defendants before the Trial Court. The ranks of the parties
are retained for the sake of convenience.
3. During the pendency of the appeal, both appellants
and the respondents have filed joint compromise application
under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC. It is agreed by both parties that
2 items of suit schedule property which are in Sy.No.71/2
measuring 2.76 acres and in Sy.No.131/2 measuring 0.24
acres (in khatha no.44, situated at Kodambur village, Madikeri
Hobli and Taluk, Kodagu district).
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
appellants to receive 1 acre of the land in Sy.No.71/2 of
Kodambur village, Madikeri village in the following manner of
the survey sketch, as below,
NC: 2025:KHC:360
"3. At the interventions of the well wishers of the
Appellants and the Respondents this compromise
petition is executed.
4. The Respondents at the request of the Appellants
have agreed to give 1 acre of land to the Appellants
in Sy. No.71/2 of Kodambur Village, Madikeri Taluk
in the following manner.
i. 0.50 acres to Sri. E U Somanna.
ii. 0.50 acres to Sri. E U Poonacha.
iii. 0.03 acres reserved as grave yard.
iv. The Extent of 1.73 acres shall continue to
remain with Smt. E U Ponamma and Sri. E U
Vijaya.
5. A Survey sketch of the property bearing Sy.
No.71/2 of Kodambur Village, Madikeri Taluk
delineated is annexed to this Compromise Petition.
6. The Item No. 2 of the Suit Schedule Property
continue to be that of the Respondents.
7. The Respondents undertake to put the Appellants
in physical possession of the properties referred
above on the 15th day of February 2025.
4. The defendants retained land in Sy.No.71/2
measuring 1.73 acres which is morefully described as B1 in the
sketch shown in white colour. The 50 cents of the said area is
marked as B2 shown in yellow colour fallen to the share of
E.U.Poonachaa/appellant No.2 and another 50 cents is coloured
NC: 2025:KHC:360
in pink, which is marked as B3 in the sketch, fallen to the share
of appellant No.1/E.U.Somanna.
5. The parties have agreed before the court regarding
the settlement in accordance with law. Hence, the same is
accepted I..A.No.1/2025 is hereby allowed.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. The parties are
allowed to compromise and consequently appeal is disposed of
in view of the compromise.
Draw decree as per the terms of compromise.
Both appellants and respondents are entitled for the
coloured copies of sketch accompanied along with the decree.
Also, the Tahsildar, Madikeri, is directed to bifurcate and
issue the mutation to the respective parties, within 3 months
from the date of receipt of the settlement copy of the decree.
Sd/-
(K.NATARAJAN)
JUDGE
AKV
SK
