Dismissed

Rajalakshmamma v. D L Jagadeesh

Karnataka HC17 Nov 2023RFA/1345/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of this regular first appeal following a joint compromise petition filed by the parties. The court modified the trial court's decree for specific performance in accordance with the terms of the compromise, and directed the refund of court fees to the appellants.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of based on the joint compromise petition. The impulse judgment and decree were modified, and court fees were refunded to the appellants.

Rajalakshmamma Vs D L Jagadeesh — Specific Performance | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:41321 RFA No. 1345 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1345 OF 2021 (SP)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

RAJALAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE B S KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,

¶8

ANIL KUMAR

¶9

S/O LATE B S KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

¶10

RASHMI W/O ANIL KUMAR AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,

¶11

SUNIL KUMAR S/O LATE B S KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

¶12

GEETHA W/O SUNIL KUMAR AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

¶13

SUREDNRA KUMAR S/O LATE B S KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

¶14

Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

APPELLANTS ARE RESIDENTS OF BANNIKUPPE VILLAGE, KYLANCHA HOBLI RAMANGARA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶16

(BY SRI. UMESH MOOLIMANI.,ADVOCATE)

¶17

…APPELLANTS

¶18

AND:

¶19

D L JAGADEESH S/O D L LINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT DODDANAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶20

…RESPONDENT

¶21

(BY SRI. PRAKASH M H.,ADVOCATE)

¶22

¶23

NC: 2023:KHC:41321 RFA No. 1345 of 2021

¶24

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.02.2019 PASSED IN OS No.274/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, RAMANAGARA, DECREED THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.

¶25

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

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 11.02.2019 passed in O.S.No.274/2014 by the Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Ramanagara, whereby the said suit filed by the respondent – plaintiff against the appellants – defendants for specific performance of Sale Agreement dated 17.11.2012 and other reliefs was decreed by the Trial Court in favour of the respondent – plaintiff against appellants – defendants.

¶28

The parties have filed a memorandum of Compromise under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC which reads as under:

¶29

“1. The appellants and respondent are physically present and admit having signed the compromise petition and have been identified by the respective counsel.

¶30

2. As per terms of the Compromise petition, respondent – plaintiff has agreed to receive a total sum of Rs.12 lakhs from the appellants – defendants towards full and final settlement of his claim, under impugned judgment and decree as well as under the Sale agreement dated 17.11.2012. In this regard, a demand draft bearing DD No.342299 dated

¶31

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:41321 RFA No. 1345 of 2021

¶32

08.11.2023 is handed over by the appellants to respondent who acknowledges the receipt of the said sum of Rs.12 lakhs from the appellant.

¶33

3. Being specified that the Compromise petition entered into by the parties is lawful. I deem it just and proper to dispose of the appeal in terms of compromise petition and by suitably modifying the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court”.

¶34

In the result, I pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

i) Appeal is hereby disposed of in terms of Joint Compromise Petition.

¶37

ii) Impugned judgment and decree passed by the Trial

¶38

Court is modified and the suit is accordingly disposed of in terms of Joint Compromise Petition.

¶39

iii) The Registry is directed to refund the entire court

¶40

fee back to the appellants forthwith without any delay, in accordance with law.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

DHA

¶43

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 70

Rajalakshmamma v. D L Jagadeesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajalakshmamma v. D L Jagadeesh

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

Mr Mohammed Haneef @ Illyaz Vs Sri G M Malik

Ms. Hitha Dhananjay Vs the State of Karnataka

Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Vs Sri. G Prem Kumar

Sri. Nandan, Vs the Chief Secretary

Sri K N Ravishankar Vs Smt Roopa K N

Shri. Kailashchandra Kasturilal Sodhi Vs M/S. Varuna Agencies