Allowed

Sri. Renukaprasad. N v. Sri. B. H. Ganganna

Karnataka HC19 Jul 2021RFA/1023/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision application, filed under Order 41 Rule 1 CPC read with Section 96 CPC against a judgment dismissing a suit, is disposed of on compromise. The appeal is allowed, setting aside the impugned judgment and decree, upon the parties reaching an agreement via a filed compromise petition.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed on compromise; impugned judgment and decree set aside; modified decree directed.

Sri. Renukaprasad. N Vs Sri. B. H. Ganganna — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JULY, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶6

RFA NO. 1023 OF 2016 (DEC)

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

SRI. RENUKAPRASAD N. S/O LATE NANJUNDAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT BYADARAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARAM DISTRICT – 562 120 … APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. NARENDRA BABU H. L., ADV. FOR SRI. SIDDAMALLAPPA P. M., ADV.)

¶10

AND :

¶11

SRI. B. H. GANGANNA S/O LATE HONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS

¶12

SRI. B. H. SADASHIVAIAH S/O LATE HONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

¶13

SRI. GANGAHONNAIAH S/O LATE NAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

¶14

SRI. PARAMASHIVAIAH S/O LATE NAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

¶15

ALL ARE R/O BYDARAHALLI KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARAM DISTRICT – 562 120

¶16

... RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT.SUMAN HEGDE, ADV. FOR R1, R2, R3 & R4)

¶18

¶19

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.04.2016 PASSED IN O.S.NO.89/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., MAGADI DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

¶20

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

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The parties have filed compromise petition under Section XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure and have prayed that the appeal be allowed in terms of compromise.

¶23

2. The appellant is present. The Respondent

¶24

No.1(b) is present and the power of attorney given to him by respondents No.1(a), 1(c) and 1(d) to represent them before the Court is produced.

¶25

Smt. Sumana Hegde, learned counsel representing respondents submits that respondent Nos.1(a), 1(c) and 1(d) have also agreed for the compromise and they have authorized respondent No.1(b) to represent them and signed the compromise petition.

¶26

4. Her submission is placed on record.

¶27

¶28

Respondents No.2, 3, 4 are present. The

¶29

parties are duly identified by their respective counsel.

¶30

The compromise petition is taken on record.

¶31

The parties state that they have agreed as

¶32

to the terms of the compromise. They have settled their disputes as per the terms of compromise. Hence, the following:-

¶33

ORDER

¶34

a. Appeal is allowed in terms of the compromise.

¶35

b. The judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.89/2015 dated 07.04.2016 by the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Magadi, is hereby set-aside.

¶36

c. Office to draw modified decree accordingly.

¶37

Sd/- JUDGE

¶38

Sri. Renukaprasad. N v. Sri. B. H. Ganganna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Renukaprasad. N v. Sri. B. H. Ganganna

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

M/S Nandhini Deluxe Vs Mr Naveen

Sri. Vinay Sudhakar Vs Sri. v. S Ramanath

Smt. Nanjamma Vs Sri. N. Narasimhamurthy

Smt Yashoda N Bhat W/O Dr N R Bhat Vs Smt Gowramma

Sri S N Ramesh S/O Narasimhamurthy Vs Smt Gowramma

Shri Richard Ratnakar Vs Smt Gowramma