Allowed

Channabasanagouda S/O. Hanamantagouda Kalwad v. Yallappa Mahadevappa Kariyannavar

Karnataka HC22 Nov 2018RSA/5087/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular first appeal against refusal of decree for specific performance. Appeal partly dismissed and disposed of on grounds of voluntary compromise between parties regarding partition of land. Court directed registry to draw decree based on terms of compromise.

What did the court decide?

Appeal against respondent No.1 dismissed. Remaining appeal disposed of in terms of compromise agreement. Registry directed to draw decree if adequate stamp paper provided.

Channabasanagouda S/O. Hanamantagouda Kalwad Vs… — Specific Performance | Karnataka HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL

¶6

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.5087/2012 (SP)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

CHANNABASANAGOUDA S/O. HANAMANTAGOUDA KALWAD AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KALAKERI 587 305 TQ: NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG.

¶9

... APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SMT. P R BENTUR, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

YALLAPPA MAHADEVAPPA KARIYANNAVAR AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KALAKERI, TQ: NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG.

¶13

VENKATESH NARAYAN SURYAVANSHI AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. 4^TH LANE, DANDAPUR, NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG 587 305

¶14

SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS

¶15

2(a) SMT. SHANTABAI W/O. VENKATESH SURYAVANSHI AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD R/O. 6^TH GALLI, DANDAPUR ONI NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG

¶16

¶17

2(b) MAHESH S/O. VENKATESH SURYAVANSHI AGE: 37 YEARS, R/O. 6^TH GALLI, DANDAPUR ONI NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG

¶18

2(c) MARUTI S/O. VENKATESH SURYAVANSHI AGE: 32 YEARS, R/O. 6^TH GALLI, DANDAPUR ONI NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG

¶19

2(d) SMT. BHARATI D/O. VENKATESH SURYAVANSHI AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O. 6^TH LANE, DANDAPUR ONI NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG

¶20

... RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. J S SHETTY & ASSTS., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. B. V. SOMAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2(a) TO R2(d)

¶22

¶23

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.09.2011 PASSED IN R.A.NO.32/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE AND SESSIONS JUDGE, GADAG AND THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.03.2010 PASSED IN O.S.NO.193/2000 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AND CJM, GADAG, INSOFAR AS THEY HAVE REFUSED DECREE FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE TO THE PLAINTIFF AND THE SAID SUIT FILED BY THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE BE DECREED AS PRAYED FOR.

¶24

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Learned counsel Sri. B. V. Somapur appears on behalf of respondents No.2(a) to 2(d). Registry is directed to print his name for respondents No.2(a) to 2(d).

¶28

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo giving up the claim as against respondent No.1. The said memo is placed on record and the appeal as against respondent No.1 is dismissed.

¶29

Learned counsel for both the parties, who are present before the Court, have filed an application under Order XXIII Rule 3 R/w. Section 151 of CPC reporting the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶30

Appellant and respondents No.2(a) to 2(d) are present before the Court. They admit the contents of the compromise petition and they submit that, after going through the contents of the said compromise petition, they have put in their signatures. The said compromise petition

¶31

¶32

has also been signed by the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondents No.2(a) to 2(d).

¶33

It is stated in the compromise petition that, as per the advice of the elders, the parties have amicably settled the matter. As per the terms of the compromise, defendants/respondents have agreed to give up 2 acres 19 guntas of land out of 6 acres 6 guntas in survey No.65/1 and entire 3 acres 27 guntas in survey No.67/3 to the plaintiff/appellant and they have also agreed to execute a registered sale deed in respect of the above said lands within fifteen days from the date of receipt of copy of this compromise decree. It is also stated that the plaintiff/appellant has already deposited an amount of Rs.91,000/as the remaining sale consideration. Defendants/respondents No.2(a) to 2(d) have agreed to take the said amount which is in deposit before the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Gadag. The plaintiff/appellant is having no objection to withdraw the said amount. The respondents also admit that the above said extent of the property is in possession of the appellant herein. It is also agreed that, out

¶34

¶35

of survey No.65/1, 3 acres 27 guntas has been given to respondent No.1 and he is in possession of the said land. The said fact is not disputed by the appellant herein as well as respondents No.2(a) to 2(d). The boundaries of the extent of land which is given to the appellant herein and respondent No.1 has also been stated in the said compromise petition and the same has been admitted by the parties.

¶36

The said compromise petition is placed on record

¶37

and the same has been accepted by the parties.

¶38

Appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise.

¶39

Registry is directed to draw up the decree in terms of

¶40

the compromise, if adequate stamp paper is provided.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

gab

Channabasanagouda S/O. Hanamantagouda Kalwad v. Yallappa Mahadevappa Kariyannavar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Channabasanagouda S/O. Hanamantagouda Kalwad v. Yallappa Mahadevappa Kariyannavar

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

Union of India Vs Hanamavva W/O Maruti Devji

Union of India Vs Mahadev S/O Fakirappa Kallapur @ Talawai

Union of India Vs Fatima W/O Imamsab Basarkode

Vasant S/O. Laxmansing Killedar Vs Bankatlal S/O. Krishanlal Upadhyaya

Smt. Mallawwa W/O Hanamant Manigar Vs Smt. Gangawwa W/O Paramanand Kabbur

Sri.Ismailsab S/O Hanifsab Bhattewale, Vs Sri.Rukmuddin S/O Khasimsab Munasi