Disposed

Dr. P.M Srinivasa Rao S/O Late P v. Madhava Rao v Dr. P.M Nagaraja Rao S/O P v Madhava Rao

Karnataka HC4 Dec 2020RFA/802/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal regarding a partition suit, parties filed a compromise petition agreeing on mutual terms. The High Court accepted the petition, recorded it as valid, and disposed of the appeal by modifying the trial court's decree accordingly.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of and the trial court judgment was modified in terms of the compromise petition.

Dr. P.M Srinivasa Rao S/O Late P v Madhava Rao Vs Dr… — Specific Performance | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2020

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶7

R.F.A.No.802/2011

¶8

BETWEEN :

¶9

Dr. P.M SRINIVASA RAO S/O LATE P.V.MADHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS OCC: MEDICAL PRACTITIONER (RETD) R/AT NO.2, SILVER DALE DRIVE, LONDON, SE -9 4DH, UNITED KINGDOM. ...APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI G.KRISHNA MURTHY, SENIOR ADV. FOR SMT.RASHMI JADHAV, ADV.)

¶11

AND :

¶12

Dr. P.M.NAGARAJA RAO S/O P.V.MADHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT No.46, RAJA BHAVAN K.C. ROAD, JANNAPURA, BHADRAVATHI SHIMOGA DISTRICT -577 301.

¶13

SRI P.M.PADMANABHA RAO S/O P.V.MADHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, MANAGER, SAHYADRI GRAMEENA BANK R/AT No.477, SUDHARSHANA NILAYA JANNAPURA, BHADRAVATHI SHIMOGA DISTRICT -577 301.

¶14

¶15

P.M.LAKSHMIKANTHA RAO S/O LATE P.V.MADHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT No.21, I CROSS, PREMAGANGA, GAVIPURAM EXTENSION, (NEAR SHEKAR’S EYE HOSPITAL) BANGALORE-560 019.

¶16

Dr. YASHODHA RAMANATH W/O RAMANATH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT No.7-218, 7^TH MAIN,

¶17

1^ST BLOCK, HSBS LAYOUT, KAYLAN NAGAR, BANGALORE -560 048.

¶18

PRESENTLY R/AT No.835, CHIRAYU 5^TH CROSS 12^TH MAIN, 1^ST PHASE, 4^TH BLOCK HBR LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 043.

¶19

P.M.MANJUNATH RAO @ M.B.PAWAR S/O LATE P.V.MADHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS AIR COMMODORE, AIR FORCE STATION HASHIMARE -735 315, WEST BENGAL PRESENTLY R/AT G8, OFFICERS MEES LANE, SECTOR 9, GANDHI NAGAR, GUJARAT.

¶20

Dr. P.M.PRABHAKARA RAO S/O P.V.MADHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT TUDOR ROSE, No.8, LITTLE FIELDS, DANBURRY, ESSEX CM 34

¶21

PRESENTLY R/AT BROOMFIELD ORTHODONTIC CLINIC CHELMSFORD, ESSEX CM 1 UNTITED KINGDOM. BY HIS G.P.A. HOLDER P.M.LAKSHMIKANTHA RAO

¶22

¶23

S/O LATE P.V.MADHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT No.21, 1^ST CROSS, PREMAGANGA GOVIPURAM EXTENSION (NEAR SHEKAR’S EYE HOSPITAL) BANGALORE-560 010.

¶24

7. P.M. DAMODARA RAO SINCE DEAD BY LRs.

¶25

7(a) Mrs. SUJATHA K.N., W/O LATE P.M.DAMODARA RAO AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

¶26

7(b) MADUSUDHAN D. PAWAR S/O LATE P.M. DAMODARA RAO AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS

¶27

BOTH ARE R/O.NO.B-104 MANTRI WOODLANDS ARAKERE GATE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE -560 076.

¶28

(CAUSE TITLE AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 02.01.2015)

¶29

K.M.MOHAN RAO S/O K.BALOJI RAO, MAJOR R/AT No.2964, 3^RD CROSS 4^TH MAIN ROAD, MCC ‘D’ BLOCK DAVANAGERE-577 201. …RESPONDENTS

¶30

(BY SRI MAHESH M., ADV. FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI SATISH M. DODDAMANI, ADV. FOR R-3, R-5 & R-6; SRI SRINIVAS M.T., ADV. FOR R-4;

¶31

SRI SHIVAPRASAD SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADV. FOR R-7(a & b); VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 23.04.2014 NOTICE TO R-8 IS

¶32

DISPENSED WITH.)

¶33

THIS R.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.02.2011 PASSED IN O.S. No.215/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BHADRAVATHI, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR THE PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.

¶34

¶35

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, S. SUJATHA, J ., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶36

J U D G M E N T

¶37

This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2011 passed in O.S.No.215/2001 by the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Bhadravathi (‘Trial Court’ for short).

¶38

The matter was heard and reserved for

¶39

judgment on 19.10.2020. Now, the parties have filed the compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC read with Section 89 of CPC.

¶40

The parties-appellant, respondent Nos.3, 4, 5, 6, 7(a) and 7(b) have appeared before the Court through video conference duly identified by their respective learned counsel. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 had made submissions before the Court through conference call arranged by their learned counsel Sri.Mahesh M., on his mobile phone. It is submitted by

¶41

all the parties that they have agreed to the terms of the compromise petition.

¶42

appellant/defendant No.2 as well as Dr. P.M. Prabhakar Rao - respondent No.6/defendant No.5 have authorized Sri. P.M. Lakshmikantha Rao - respondent No.3/defendant No.3 to sign the compromise petition on their behalf.

¶43

Lakshmikantha Rao from Dr. P.M. Srinivasa Rao authorizing Sri. P.M. Lakshmikantha Rao to sign the present compromise petition on behalf of Dr. P.M. Srinivasa Rao is also placed before the Court. The same is taken on record.

¶44

The parties have declared that they have

¶45

subscribed their signature to the compromise petition after reading the contents of the same on their own

¶46

¶47

volition, there being no threat, coercion, force or

¶48

pressure from anybody.

¶49

The compromise petition is also signed by

¶50

the respective learned counsel appearing for the parties. As the compromise relates to an inter-se dispute settled between the parties, there is no legal impediment for the Court to accept the same. Accordingly, the compromise petition is placed on record.

¶51

The appeal stands disposed of in terms of

¶52

the compromise entered into between the parties as per

¶53

the compromise petition.

¶54

The judgment and decree of the Trial Court stands modified in terms of the compromise petition.

¶55

Compromise petition shall become part and parcel of the modified decree.

¶56

¶57

Registry shall draw modified decree accordingly.

¶58

All pending I.As. stand disposed of.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

PMR

Dr. P.M Srinivasa Rao S/O Late P v. Madhava Rao v Dr. P.M Nagaraja Rao S/O P v Madhava Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. P.M Srinivasa Rao S/O Late P v. Madhava Rao v Dr. P.M Nagaraja Rao S/O P v Madhava Rao

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

Sri. Rajanna Vs Sri. Venkatesh. H. T.

M/S National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Mr Dattatareya T R

The Branch Manager Vs Smt Swarnalatha J Shetty

Sri N Sadashiva Shetty Vs Sri Atavulla H

K P Ramesh Vs Smt a Vani

The Claim Manager Vs Kiran Kumar P