Dismissed

Sri B Raghuveer Acharya v. Smt N S Geetha

Karnataka HC11 Aug 2014WP/33088/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenging an order in an execution case was disposed of when the parties filed a compromise petition under Order XXI Rule 3 CPC. The court confirmed the compromise terms involving partial payment and conditions for full settlement, finding no element of unlawfulness or collusion, leading to the dismissal of the Writ Petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed in view of the compromise entered into between the parties; order confirmed as lawful.

Sri B Raghuveer Acharya Vs Smt N S Geetha — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.33088 OF 2012 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Sri. B. Raghuveer Acharya, Son of Late Vasudeva Acharya, Aged about 59 years, Residing at No.237, 4^th Main, Canara Bank Colony, Nagarabhavi Road, Bangalore – 560 072. (By Shri. K.N. Mahabaleshwara Rao, Advocate) AND:

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

Smt. N.S.Geetha, Wife of H.R.Sudarshan Prasad, Aged about 57 years, Residing at No.503, 3^rd Main, 6^th Block, BSK 3^rd Stage, Bangalore – 560 085.

¶11

…RESPONDENT

¶12

(By Shri. H.S.Dwarakanath, Advocate Caveator/Respondent) *****

¶13

¶14

This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash Annexure-Q order dated 18.6.2012 on I.A.No.IV in execution case No.1697/2007 on the file of XIV Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore and consequently direct the XIV Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore to conduct enquiry in terms of I.A.No.IV vide Annexure-G, filed by the petitioner under Section 47 read with Section 151 CPC.

¶15

This Writ Petition coming on for Hearing this day, the court made the following:

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

The parties have filed a compromise petition under Order

¶18

XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which reads

¶19

as follows:

¶20

“UNDER ORDE XXIII RULE 3 of CIVIL

¶21

PROCEDURE CODE

¶22

The petitioner and respondent beg to submit as follows:-

¶23

The petitioner and respondent have arrived at a compromise. The terms of the compromise is that petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.6,50,000/- to the respondent on 07.08.2014, the receipt of which is hereby confirmed by the respondent.

¶24

¶25

The petitioner has agreed that he shall pay a further sum of Rs.43,50,000/- on or before 30.11.2014. In the event of the petitioner making payment of Rs.43,50,000/- on or before 30.11.2014, the same shall be received by the respondent in full and final settlement of her claims under final settlement agreement dated 24.11.2000 and from that day she shall have no claims whatsoever against the petitioner.

¶26

However in the event of the petitioner not making payment of Rs.43,50,000/- on or before 30.11.2014, the respondent shall be entitled to execute the final settlement dated 24.11.2000 for the entire amount payable as per the final settlement arrived at.

¶27

The petitioner confirms that he shall have no objection for the property attached in Execution Petition No.1697/2007 to be sold in accordance with law for the respondent to realize the balance amount payable in the event of he not making payment of Rs.43,50,000/- on or before 30.11.2014.

¶28

However in the event of Rs.43,50,000/being paid on or before 30.11.2014, the respondent shall withdraw the Execution Petition No.1697/2007 pending before City Civil Judge, Bangalore (CCH:28), report full satisfaction of the amount

¶29

¶30

payable under final settlement agreement and confirm that she has no rights whatsoever with respect to the property that has been attached in Execution No.1697/2007 and which is brought to sale.

¶31

Both the parties shall make a request before the Trial Court to adjourn Execution No.1697/2007 to a date beyond 30.11.2014 and in the event of the payment being made by the petitioner as stated above, the Execution Petition shall be got dismissed and in the event of payment being not made, the Execution Petition shall be proceeded with.

¶32

For the purposes of payment, the petitioner may have to dispose off the property which has been attached. In view of the order of attachment for a larger sum, it would be difficult for the petitioner to sell the said property.

¶33

In the event of the property being sold by the petitioner, the sale consideration to the extent of Rs.43,50,000/- shall be directed to be paid directly to the respondent/decree holder and in such an event the respondent shall sign as a consenting witness in the sale deed to be executed or in the alternative shall get the Execution Petition dismissed by recording full and final settlement and the respondent shall totally co-

¶34

¶35

operate for facilitating sale of the property by the petitioner.

¶36

It is confirmed by the petitioner that final settlement agreement dated 24.11.2000 before Sri.A.Lingappa, Conciliator, had been arrived at between the parties which is sought to be executed in Execution No.1697/2007 and in that view of the matter the compromise is being entered into.

¶37

In view of this settlement, the Writ Petition may be dismissed.”

¶38

On a perusal of the tenor of the Compromise Petition,

¶39

it is evident that there is nothing unlawful or collusive in the said Compromise Petition. The same is ordered accordingly.

¶40

The writ petition stands disposed of in view of the

¶41

compromise entered into between the parties.

¶42

Sd/JUDGE

¶43

Sri B Raghuveer Acharya v. Smt N S Geetha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri B Raghuveer Acharya v. Smt N S Geetha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Rathnamma Vs Smt. Y N Amaravathi

Sri Chikkalingaiah Vs M.Venkatesh

Karnataka Kshatriya Maratha Parishath Vs M/S. Karnataka Kshatriya

Sri Bapakunhi Vs Sri Vishwanatha Rai

Gowramma Vs Kalamma

Union of India Vs Smt.Venkatamma