[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Goutam S/O Raja R Jahagirdar vs Raja And Ors on 24 March, 2026
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
Bench: Suraj Govindaraj
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2626-DB
RFA No. 200090 of 2020
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
AND
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.200090 OF 2020 (PA/DE/IN)
BETWEEN:
GOUTAM S/O RAJA R. JAHAGIRDAR,
AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: MEDICAL PRACTITIONER,
R/O: H.NO.1-55/5-A/1, OLD JEWARGI ROAD,
BEHIND MOHAN LODGE, KALABURAGI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NARENDRA M. REDDY, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
KHAJAAMEEN AND:
MALAGHAN
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 1. RAJA S/O RANGACHAR JAHAGIRDAR,
SINCE DECEASED.
THE APPELLANT AND RESPONDENT NO.2 ARE THE LEGAL
REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
DECEASED - RESPONDENT NO.1
2. SMT. GAYATRI D/O RAJA R. JAHAGIRDAR,
(W/O GOPALRAO KULKARNI),
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O "VARDHA APARTMENTS",
1ST FLOOR, BEHIND SANGAMESHWAR COLLEGE,
RAILWAY LINES, SOLAPUR-413001.
STATE: MAHARASHTRA.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2626-DB
RFA No. 200090 of 2020
HC-KAR
3. SMT. ALKA W/O ARUN BORGAONKAR,
AGE: 73 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: BESIDE POST OFFICE,
OPP. SAWADI COMPLEX, BORGAONKAR BUILDING,
SUPER MARKET ROAD, KALABURAGI-585102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR KALLOOR, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. NAGARAJ PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. MANJUNATH MALLAYYA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLI
RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 96 OF CPC, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
ENTIRE RECORDS IN O.S.NO.45/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST
ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI, (B) SET-ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.03.2020 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.45/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE, KALABURAGI, CONSEQUENTLY, DECREE THE SUIT OF THE
PLAINTIFF IN O.S.NO.45/2012, ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST ADDL.
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI, (C) AWARD COSTS OF THE
SUIT AND THIS PROCEEDINGS, (D) PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER/S,
OR RELIEFS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE FACTS
AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2626-DB
RFA No. 200090 of 2020
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
and
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
1. The plaintiff in O.S.No.45/2012 is before this Court
seeking the following relief:-
"(a) To call for the entire records in O.S.No.45/2012
on the file of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge,
Kalaburagi, (b) Set-aside the judgment and decree
dated 10.03.2020 passed in O.S.No.45/2012 on the
file of the 1st Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi,
consequently, decree the suit of the plaintiff in
O.S.No.45/2012 on the file of the 1st Addl. Senior
Civil Judge, Kalaburagi, (c) Award costs of the suit
and this proceedings, (d) Pass such other order/s, or
reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit under the
facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of
justice and equity."
2. The suit in O.S.No.45/2012 was filed before the I
Addl. Senior Civil Judge, at Kalaburagi, seeking for
the following reliefs:-
I. A decree be granted declaring that gift deed
bearing document No.1684/2003-04 dated
02.06.2003 pertaining to the part of the suit house
bearing No.1-760 is void, ineffective and not binding
on the plaintiff.
II. A decree be granted declaring the gift deed
document bearing No.2595/2004-05 dated
09.07.2004, pertaining to the suit house bearing
No.1-655/5-A/1 and 1-655/5-A/2 is void, ineffective,
an not binding on the plaintiff.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2626-DB
HC-KAR
III. A decree effecting partition and separate
possession of plaintiff's 1/3rd share in the suit
properties be granted.
IV. The defendants be perpetually restrained from
causing interference in the plaintiff's right of
remaining in possession and occupation of his 1/3rd
share in the suit house bearing No.1-655/5-A/1 and
1-655/5A/2.
V. Granting any other relief to which the plaintiff is
found entitled to.
3. In the said suit, counter claim was filed by defendant
No.3 contending that he is the actual owner of the
property, which came to be dismissed. The suit
having been dismissed, the plaintiff is before this
Court.
4. During pendency of the matter, defendant No.1's
father has also expired leaving behind the plaintiff
and defendant No.2 to succeed to his properties.
Defendant No.3 is stated to be a third party who is
not concerned with the family and not having any
interest in the property.
5. The parties have entered into a compromise and a
compromise petition has been filed signed by the
appellant, defendants No.2 and 3, identified by their
respective advocates. The said compromise petition
reads as under:-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2626-DB
HC-KAR
"1) The plaintiff/appellant filed suit O.S.No.45/2012 on
the file of Ist Addl. Senior Civil Judge at Kalaburagi for the
relief of declaration, partition, separate possession and
perpetual injunction against the defendants and the same
was objected by the defendants/respondents and the said
suit was dismissed by the trail court vide judgment and
decree dated:10.03.2020.
2) That the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment
and decree dated: 10.03.2020 in O.S.No.45/2012 passed
by the learned I Addl. Senior Civil Judge at Kalaburagi is
before this Hon'ble court as against the dismissal of the
suit.
3) That as agreed by the parties that the suit properties
have been derived as below:
i) That the H.No.1-760 in CTS.No:1811 and 1818
comprising the compound area along with open space
situated behind Vithal Mandir, Upper Lane, Station Bazar,
Kalaburagi.
This property was owned and possessed by Dr. R.
B. Jahagirdar grandfather of the plaintiff and defendant
No.2. Dr. R. B. Jahagirdar purchased this property from
one Muralidhar Rao out of his earnings. This is the self
acquired property of the grandfather of the plaintiff and
defendant No.2. Partition was effected by the deceased
grandfather of the plaintiff and defendant No.2 in the year
1955-56 and this property was allotted to the share of
defendant No.1 i.e., father of plaintiff and defendant
No.2. Since, then the defendant No.1 is the owner and
possessor of the said property.
ii) That H.No.1-655/5A/1 and Η.No.1-655/5A/2
with CTS.No:2021 situated at old Jewargi road comprising
of the residential and commercial shops.
This property was owned and possessed by Dr.
Sundrabai Borgoankar. She purchased this property out of
her earnings. It was her self acquired property. Dr.
Sundrabai Borgaonkar bequeathed the said property to
Smt. Sunanda Jahagirdar foster daughter of Dr.
Sundrabai Borgaonkar vide document No.1-1971-72. Dr.
Sundrabai Borgaonkar died in the year 1994. Since, then
Dr. Sunanda Jahagirdar is the absolute owner and
possessor of this property. Sunanda Jahagirdar mother of
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2626-DB
HC-KAR
the plaintiff and defendant No.2 gifted this property to her
husband R. R. Jahagirdar Advocate. i.e., defendant No.1
on 09.07.2004 vide document No.1684/2003-04. Since,
then the defendant No.1 is the owner and possessor of
this property.
4) That, due to intervention of respectable persons, the
parties have arrived for compromise on the following
terms and conditions.
The properties to be partitioned are as follows:
i) That the H.No.1-760 in CTS.No:1811 and 1818
comprising the compound area along with open space
measuring 7724 Sq. ft situated behind Vithal Mandir,
Upper Lane, Station Bazar, Kalaburagi.
Boundaries of this property is as follows;
South: Road connection Railway Station and Old Jewargi
Road,
North: Residence of Ramakrishna Pawar.
East: Road towards Vithal Mandir.
West: Private properties.
This property is the ancestral property of the
parties to this suit. The plaintiff and defendant No.2 are
the co-parceners of the property. The plaintiff and
defendant No.2 has equal share in the property. The
plaintiff and defendant No.2 are the joint owners of this
property. It is agreed between the parties that the said
property be mutated in their names as joint owners. It is
also agreed that the said property shall be sold/disposed
off and the proceeds of the sale will be divided equally
between the parties.
ii) H.No.1-655/5A/1 and H.No.1-655/5A/2 which
consists of a house and 4 shops with a staircase. This
property measures 1) H.No.1-655/5A/1 measuring 4921
Sq. ft and 2) H.No.1-655/5A/2 which are the shops
measuring 679 Sq. ft situated behind Mohan Lodge, Old
Jewargi Road, Station Bazar, Kalaburagi.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2626-DB
HC-KAR
Boundaries of this property are as follows;
East- Garden of Municipality
West- Old Jewargi Road,
North- Mohan Lodge,
South- Lane and then house of Uday Honguntikar
Hence, this property was owned and processed by
the mother of plaintiff and defendant No.2. Defendant
No.1 was father of the parties, who expired on
21.09.2022. Mother of the parties died on 10.07.2004.
This is not the self-acquired property of defendant No.1.
This is also the joint family property of the parties to this
suit.
The plaintiff and defendant No.2 are the joint
owners of the property also. It is agreed between the
parties that the property will be mutated in the names of
both the plaintiff and defendant No.2 as both have half
share each in this property.
It is also agreed between the parties that though
the plaintiff and defendant No.2 are entitled for half share
in the property, the entire house will be in enjoyment and
use of the plaintiff and his wife during their lifetime.
It is also agreed between the parties that neither
the plaintiff nor the defendant No.2 have any right to
mortgage, sell or demolish their half portion of the
property during the lifetime of the plaintiff and his wife.
As the house and shops rent is utilized by the
plaintiff and his wife, the property tax, water tax,
electricity bill and any other govt. taxes if levied will be
paid by the plaintiff and his wife during their lifetime.
As the house and shops are enjoyed by the plaintiff
and his wife, the defendant No.2 has no right to evacuate
them from this property during their lifetime.
That it is further agreed by the parties that after
the demise of defendant No.2 her half share in this
property shall be transferred in the name of her sons
Agasti S/o Gopal Kulkarni and Akshay S/o Gopal Kulkarni.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2626-DB
HC-KAR
5) That for the above said compromise the respondent
No.3 is not having objection for the same as she has no
right and title in the suit schedule properties.
6) That the said compromise between the parties is with
free will, without coercion or undue influence, in order to
have cordial relationship between the parties to the suit."
6. Upon enquiry with all three parties present before
this Court, they submit that they have voluntarily
entered into the compromise petition. It is affirmed
that the same has been executed without any fraud,
undue influence, or coercion.
7. The appellant and defendant No.2 submit that the
property bearing House No.1-760 in CTS Nos.1811
and 1818 shall be mutated in their joint names. They
further state that they intend to sell the said
property and divide the sale proceeds equally
between them.
8. The appellant and defendant No.2 further submit
that, in respect of the properties bearing House
No.1-655/5A/1 and House No.1-655/5A/2,
comprising four shops (hereinafter referred to as the
"schedule properties"), the same shall stand mutated
jointly in the names of the plaintiff and defendant
No.2, each having an undivided half share therein.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2626-DB
HC-KAR
9. Notwithstanding the above, it is expressly agreed as
follows:
9.1. The plaintiff and his wife shall, during their joint
lives and thereafter the survivor of them during
his or her lifetime, have a life interest in the
schedule properties, with the full and exclusive
right to receive and appropriate the entire
rental income and usufruct arising therefrom.
Such life interest shall not include any right of
alienation, transfer, encumbrance, or creation
of third-party interests so as to prejudice the
rights of the remainderman;
9.2. Upon the demise of both the plaintiff and his
wife, the vested remainder in the schedule
properties shall devolve absolutely upon
defendant No.2, who shall thereupon be
entitled to full ownership, possession and all
incidental rights thereto;
9.3. In the event that defendant No.2 predeceases
both the plaintiff and his wife, or does not
survive the termination of the aforesaid life
interest, the remainder shall devolve, in equal
shares, upon her sons, namely, Agasti Kulkarni
and Akshay Kulkarni, as substituted
remaindermen, who shall thereupon take the
properties absolutely.
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2626-DB
HC-KAR
9.4. It is clarified that the life interest created herein
is limited strictly to the right of enjoyment of
income (usufruct), and no ownership rights in
the corpus of the schedule properties shall vest
in the plaintiff or his wife beyond such limited
interest. The corpus shall remain subject to the
vested remainder and substitution as stipulated
above.
10. Defendant No.3, who is also present before this
Court, has unequivocally stated that she has no
right, title or interest in any portion of the subject
properties and has no objection whatsoever to the
arrangement arrived at between the plaintiff and
defendant No.2.
11. In view of the above, the compromise petition is
taken on record and accepted.
12. The Registry is directed to draw up a decree in terms
of the said compromise petition within a period of 30
days from the date of this order.
Sd/-
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
KJJ
List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1
Ct:si
