Karnataka High Court
R Patric vs Chandru on 11 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:20114
RSA No. 1142 of 2013
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1142 OF 2013 (DEC/INJ-)
BETWEEN:
1. R. PATRIC,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
S/O, RATNAM,
RESIDING AT NO.114/2B,
II CROSS, RAJENDRANAGARA,
MYSORE-570007.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.T.P.VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally 1. CHANDRU,
signed by AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
SUNITHA K S S/O.LATE VENKATAIAH,
Location: RESIDING AT NO.142/1,
HIGH COURT MODEL HOUSE BLOCK,
OF TANK ROAD, 4TH CROSS,
KARNATAKA
N.R.MOAHLLA,
MYSORE-570001,
SINCE DEAD, BY HIS LR's
1(a) SOMASHEKAR,
S/O LATE CHANDRU V,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT NO.142, 4TH CROSS TANK ROAD,
N.R.MOAHLLA,
MYSORE-570007.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:20114
RSA No. 1142 of 2013
HC-KAR
1(b) LOKESH C,
S/O LATE CHANDRU V,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT NO.14217781,
VIJAYANAGAR 4TH STAGE,
II PHASE, MYSORE-570032.
1(C) SRI.RAVIPRAKASH C,
S/O LATE V CHANDRU,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/AT NO.187, GANESH NAGAR,
MASHANA GATE OPP. ROAD,
MYSORE-570007.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY MS.SAMASHRITHA R, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. AKARSH KUMAR GOWDA, ADVOCATE
FOR PROPOSED R1(A);
VIDE ORDER DATED 11.06.2025 R1(B) AND R1(C) ARE
DELETED)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.3.2013 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.9/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER,
FAST TRACK COURT IV, MYSORE, DISMISSING THE APPEAL
AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
12.9.2011 PASSED IN O.S.NO.1387/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE
III ADDL. I CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., MYSORE.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:20114
RSA No. 1142 of 2013
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Learned counsel for respondent No.1(a) filed a memo
stating that the deceased respondent No.1 i.e.,
V.Chandru had gifted the property situated at
No.142/1, Model House Block, Tank Road, 4th cross,
N.R.Mohalla, Mysore in favour of respondent No.1(a)
and, hence, the other legal heirs of deceased
respondent No.1 i.e., respondent No.1(b) and 1(c)
do not have any right over the suit schedule property
as respondent No.1(a) is the absolute owner. Hence,
the signatures of respondent No.1(b) and 1(c) on the
compromise petition may be dispensed with, and
that respondent No.1(a) undertakes to produce the
gift deed executed by respondent No.1 in favour of
respondent No.1(a) on or before 17.06.2025.
2. The memo is placed on record.
NC: 2025:KHC:20114
HC-KAR
3. The appellant and respondent No.1(a) are physically
present before the Court. They are identified by their
respective counsel.
4. The appellant and respondent No.1(a) filed a
compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC,
which reads as under:
"1. The appellant has filed a suit in OS
No.1387/2007 for a declaration that the
staircase put up by the defendant towards the
western side of the suit schedule property
encroaching upon the set back area of 4'. In
addition, the appellant has also sought for
mandatory injunction to remove the staircase
or in the alternative permit him to remove the
stair case at the cost of the defendant.
2. The case of the appellant was that he is the
owner of suit schedule property having
purchased the same through registered Sale
Deed dated 15.06.2006. Out of the total plot
measuring 45' X 50', construction has been put
up in 41' X 50' leaving setback of about 4' on
the western side of the property.
3.The defendant has contended that in the
partition dated 29.11.1999, he and his brother
have partitioned the remaining extent of 30' X
50' i.e., 22' × 20' each to the defendant and
his younger brother Shri.Nagendra and a
passage of 8' has been provided for common
usage.
NC: 2025:KHC:20114
HC-KAR
4. Trial court has dismissed the suit and the
First Appellate court has confirmed the
judgment of the Trial Court. Challenging the
said judgments the above appeal is file.
5. During the pendency of the above appeal,
the appellant and the legal representatives of
the original defendant i.e., respondent
Nos.1(a) herein on the aid and advice of their
respective Counsel and well-wishers have
decided to give a quietus to the dispute by
amicably settling the matter in the following
terms:
(i) Out of the area of 8' existing in
between the building belongs to the
appellant and the respondents, the
appellant shall be entitled to retain
3' X 50' and the respondents shall
be entitled to retain 5' X 50'.
(ii) The respondents shall alter the
staircase at the North- West corner
attached to the appellant's building
and make suitable alteration for
ingress and egress to their
residential house within 3 months
from today.
(iii) The appellant shall be entitled to
put up compound wall on the
western side of his property within
the boundary of 3' as detailed in
para (i) above. It is clarified that the
compound shall be within 3' area.
(iv) The respondent Nos.1(a) have no
claim whatsoever in respect of the
area measuring 3' X 50' from north
to south.
NC: 2025:KHC:20114
HC-KAR
(v) The appellant has no claim over the
area measuring 5' X 50' north to
south.
(vi) The respondent Nos.1(a)
undertakes to alter the staircase
existing on the North-West corner
attached to the building belongs to
the appellant.
(vii) The appellant is at liberty to put up
construction of compound wall as
mentioned above within four weeks
from the date of removal of the
staircase as per Clause (ii) above.
(viii) At the time of alteration of staircase
by Respondent No.1(a) and at the
time of construction of compound
wall by the appellant, the appellant
and Respondent No.1(a) shall
cooperate each other and do not
raise any objections.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, the appellant and
respondent Nos.1(a) to 1(c) respectfully
pray that this Hon'ble Court may be
pleased to dispose of the above appeal in
the aforesaid terms, in the interest of
justice and equity."
5. The contents of the compromise petition are read
over, and explained to the parties. They have
accepted the terms and conditions mentioned in the
compromise petition and, accordingly, prays to
NC: 2025:KHC:20114
HC-KAR
dispose of the appeal, in terms of the compromise
petition.
6. The compromise petition is taken on record.
7. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of, in terms of
the compromise petition.
8. The office is directed to draw a decree in terms of
compromise petition.
9. In view of the disposal of the appeal, I.A.No.1/2024
does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the
same is disposed of.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S.KINAGI)
JUDGE
