Disposed

Parvati W/O Chandrashekhar Mamani v. Veerabhadrappa S/O Siddappa Pattanashetti and Ors.

Karnataka HC23 Nov 2018RSA/200092/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this regular second appeal, the High Court disposed of the appeal by accepting and approving a compromise petition filed by the parties. The decree was drawn to reflect the agreed terms regarding land allotment, possession delivery, and mutation of names, effectively resolving the dispute without further judicial determination on merits.

What did the court decide?

The compromise petition was accepted; a decree was drawn allotting 2 acres to the appellant, recognizing respondent No.1 as absolute owner of remaining Sy.No.99, and ordering delivery of possession.

Parvati W/O Chandrashekhar Mamani Vs Veerabhadrappa S/O Siddappa… — Partition | Karnataka HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

¶6

RSA NO.200092/2015

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

PARVATI W/O CHANDRASHEKHAR MAMANI AGE: 34 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE & HOUSEHOLD R/O: HANDIGANUR TQ: SINDAGI DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586128.

¶9

... APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI.ASHOK.S.KINAGI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

VEERABHADRAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA PATTANASHETTI AGE: MAJOR OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O: AHERI VILLAGE TQ: SINDAGI DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586128.

¶13

SARASWATI S/O SHIVANAND NELLAGI AGE: 32 YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD R/O: KALAKERI TQ: SINDAGI DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586128.

¶14

NIRMALA W/O SIDDAPPA SALAKI AGE: 29 YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD R/O: SASANUR TQ: SINDAGI DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586128.

¶15

¶16

SRIDEVI W/O ARAVIND KOPPA AGE: 27 YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD R/O: BANTHANAL TQ: SINDAGI DIST: VIJAYPUR-586128.

¶17

LAXMI D/O KADALINGAPPA PATTANASHETTI AGE: 24 YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD R/O: BINJALBHAVI TQ: SINDAGI DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586128.

¶18

... RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI.GURURAJ RAO KAKKERI, ADVOCATE)

¶20

THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.12.2014 PASSED IN R.A.NO.105/2012 BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, BIJAPUR AND CONSEQUENTLY, RESTORE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 21.04.2012 PASSED IN O.S.NO.26/2008 BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SINDAGI WITH COST THROUGHOUT.

¶21

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The appellant-Smt.Parvati w/o Chandrashekhar Mamani has filed a suit in O.S.No.26/2008 before the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindagi, for declaration and injunction against her mother, sisters and defendant No.6-Veerbhadrappa. The said suit was decreed on 21.04.2012. The operative portion of the judgment is as under :-

¶25

“The suit of the plaintiff is decreed as prayed for and it is hereby declared that suit Sy.No.99 to the extent of 05.00 acres of Kalakeri village and house bearing VPC.No.189 of Binjalbhavi village which is in joint possession and ownership of the plaintiff and defendants No.1 to 5, it is hereby declared that plaintiff is having 1/6^th share and defendant No.6 is permanently restrained from causing the obstruction to the peaceful possession and enjoyment of 1/6^th share of plaintiff.

¶26

¶27

Further it is ordered that the M.E.No.144 is not binding on the plaintiff and same is hereby cancelled, as it is illegal.

¶28

Further it is ordered and decreed that counter claim made by defendants No.1 to 5 is hereby allowed holding that they are entitled for 1/6^th share each in the suit property as prayed for.

¶29

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case no order as to costs.

¶30

Draw preliminary decree accordingly”.

¶31

Being aggrieved by the same, the defendant No.6-Veerbhadrappa has filed regular appeal in R.A.No.105/2012 before the learned II Additional District Judge, Bijapur. On 10.12.2014 learned II Additional District Judge, Bijapur has allowed the appeal. The operative portion of the judgment is as under :-

¶32

¶33

“I.A.No.2 under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, I.A.No.3 under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC are hereby rejected.

¶34

Appeal filed by the defendant No.6/appellant herein under Order 41 Rule-1 read with Section 96 CPC is hereby allowed.

¶35

Judgment and decree of the trial Court in O.S.No.26/2008 and allowing of the counter claim are hereby set-aside by holding that suit as brought by the plaintiff/respondent No.1 and the counter claim of defendants No.1 to 5 as not maintainable”.

¶36

Being aggrieved by the same the plaintiffSmt.Parvati w/o Chandrashekhar Mamani, has filed this regular second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶37

On 16.08.2018 the parties have filed the

¶38

compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶39

¶40

Today the matter is posted for consideration

¶41

of compromise petition. All the parties are present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels. All the parties and their respective counsels are signed on the compromise petition. The respective parties are agreed that, there is no any coercion to file the compromise petition and with their consent the compromise petition has been filed.

¶42

The compromise petition is taken on record. The compromise petition reads as under :-

¶43

“That, due to intervention of respectable persons, parties have arrived for compromise on the following terms and conditions.

¶44

a) It is agreed and settled that, respondents have agreed to allot 2 acres of land bearing Sy.No.99 bounded by :-

¶45

¶46

East : Government road, Tumbagi road West : Land of Sasanor North : Land of Murigeppa s/o Sangappa Pattanashetti

¶47

South : Remaining land Sy.No.99 situated at Kalakeri village

¶48

and also agreed to allot entire VPC.No.189 of Binjalbhavi village towards share of appellant, accordingly the respondents have delivered possession of above said property to the appellant. The appellant is entitled to get her name mutated in records as owner and possessor.

¶49

b) It’s agreed and settled that, respondent No.1 shall be absolute owner of remaining extent of land in Sy.No.99, other respondents have no right or claim in the land.

¶50

c) It’s agreed and settled that, respondent No.1 shall clear all dues on the property allotted to the share of appellant.

¶51

¶52

The said compromise petition is accepted. In

¶53

terms of the compromise petition, the Regular Second Appeal is disposed off.

¶54

Office is hereby directed to draw the decree

¶55

in terms of compromise petition filed under Order 23

¶56

RULE 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶57

KJJ

¶58

Sd/JUDGE

Parvati W/O Chandrashekhar Mamani v. Veerabhadrappa S/O Siddappa Pattanashetti and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parvati W/O Chandrashekhar Mamani v. Veerabhadrappa S/O Siddappa Pattanashetti and Ors.

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

Ramrao Vs the State of Karnataka through Deputy Commissioner

Niranjappa S/O Late Bheemanna Vs M.Punyavanthi D/O Niranjappa

Gurappa S/O Tukkappa Ganur @ Uppar Vs Devadas Dhareppa Gannur and Ors.

Yamanappa S/O Nagappa Gulaganji Vs Sidagond @ Siddappa and Ors.

Sri. Channabasappa and Ors. Vs Sri.Amarappa

Prabhavati Vs Rukmabai and Ors.