Allowed

Smt Mahadevamma v. Sri B Ramegowda

Karnataka HC22 Nov 2023RFA/540/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Bengaluru disposed of a regular first appeal filed against a decree for specific performance of a sale agreement. The court modified the impugned decree based on a joint settlement memo where the respondent agreed to pay an additional sum. The appellants were directed to execute the sale deed upon receipt of the additional money, and court fees were ordered refunded to parties.

What did the court decide?

The appeal disposed of based on the Joint Memo; impugned judgment modified; appellants directed to execute Sale Deed upon receiving Rs.5 lakhs; court fees refunded to both parties; sum of Rs.50,000 de

Smt Mahadevamma Vs Sri B Ramegowda — Specific Performance | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:42141 RFA No. 540 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶7

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.540 OF 2021 (SP)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT MAHADEVAMMA W/O LATE RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

¶10

SMT ASHARANI W/O CHANDRA D/O LATE RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT POLICE QUARTERS NANJANGUD TOWN

¶11

NANJANGUD – 571 301.

¶12

SRINIVASADEVARAHATTI S/O LATE RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

¶13

SMT USHARANI D/O LATE RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

¶14

Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

SMT NISHARANI D/O RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS

¶16

APPELLANTS 1 AND 3 TO 5 ARE R/A WARD NO.1, MADHUVANAHALLI KRISHNARAJA NAGARA TOWN

¶17

MYSURU DISTRICT – 571 602.

¶18

…APPELLANTS

¶19

(BY SRI. T.H.AVIN., ADVOCATE)

¶20

AND:

¶21

SRI B RAMEGOWDA S/O LATE BILIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/A BYADARAHALLI VILLAGE HEBBALU HOBLI, K R NAGAR TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT – 571 602. …RESPONDENT

¶22

(BY SRI. B.S. NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE)

¶23

¶24

NC: 2023:KHC:42141 RFA No. 540 of 2021

¶25

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.04.2021 PASSED IN O.S.NO.14/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, K.R.NAGAR, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT.

¶26

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

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 15.04.2021 passed in O.S.No.14/2017 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, K.R.Nagar, whereby the said suit filed by the respondent – plaintiff against the appellants – defendants, for specific performance of Sale Agreement dated 29.09.2016 and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule property was decreed by the Trial Court in favour of the respondent – plaintiff and against the appellants – defendants.

¶29

As per the impugned judgment and decree, appellants – defendants were directed to execute the registered Sale Deed in relation to the suit schedule property in favour of the respondent – plaintiff within a period of three months, failing which the respondent – plaintiff was at liberty to get the registered Sale Deed through execution proceedings.

¶30

¶31

NC: 2023:KHC:42141 RFA No. 540 of 2021

¶32

3. Appellants and respondents have filed Joint Memo of

¶33

settlement, which reads as under:

¶34

“JOINT MEMO

¶35

“The undersigned counsels for the appellants and the respondent submit this Joint memo as under:

¶36

- That the Appellants and the Respondent got this appeal settled out of Court and the Respondent has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five Lakhs only), in addition to earlier consideration amount.

¶37

- That the Respondent has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) to Appellants at the time of execution of Sale Deed by the appellants.

¶38

- That this appeal may be disposed of accordingly and the entire court fee may be ordered to be refunded to the appellants.”

¶39

Appellant No.3 has signed the Joint Memo on behalf of himself as well as other appellants and the same is also signed by learned counsel for the appellants. Similarly, respondent has signed the Joint Memo as well as his learned counsel. Both parties admit execution of the Joint Memo and submit that they have voluntarily signed the same.

¶40

As per the terms and conditions of the Joint Memo, respondent – plaintiff has agreed to pay an additional sum of Rs.5 lakhs for the purpose of enabling the appellants – defendants to

¶41

¶42

NC: 2023:KHC:42141 RFA No. 540 of 2021

¶43

execute the registered Sale Deed in favour of the respondent – plaintiff. The appellants submit that they would execute the registered Sale Deed in favour of the respondent – plaintiff by receiving a sum of Rs.5 lakhs within a period of one month from today.

¶44

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the Joint Memo filed on behalf of the parties, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this appeal in terms of the Joint Memo by suitably modifying the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court and substituting the same with the terms and conditions of the said Joint Memo.

¶45

In the result, I pass the following:

¶46

ORDER

¶47

(i) The petition is hereby disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo.

¶48

(ii) The impugned judgment and decree dated 15.04.2021 passed in O.S.No.14/2017 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, K.R.Nagar, is hereby modified.

¶49

¶50

NC: 2023:KHC:42141 RFA No. 540 of 2021

¶51

(iii) Appellants – defendants are directed to execute the registered Sale Deed in respect of the suit schedule property in favour of the respondent – plaintiff by receiving a total sum of Rs.5 lakhs from the respondent – plaintiff within a period of one month from today.

¶52

(iv) Registry of this Court is directed to refund the entire Court Fee of Rs.64,875/- back to the appellants forthwith without any delay.

¶53

(v) So also, Registry of the Trial Court is directed to refund the entire Court Fee of Rs.64,875/paid on the plaint back to the respondent – plaintiff forthwith immediately upon receiving of copy of this order.

¶54

(vi) Pursuant to the impugned judgment and decree, respondent – plaintiff has deposited balance sale consideration of Rs.50,000/- before the Trial Court as per the impugned judgment and decree. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, Registry of the Trial Court is directed to disburse / release the

¶55

¶56

NC: 2023:KHC:42141 RFA No. 540 of 2021

¶57

said sum of Rs.50,000/- deposited by the respondent – plaintiff in favour of the appellants – defendants forthwith without any delay and immediately upon receipt of a copy of this order.

¶58

(vii) Registry is directed to draw up decree accordingly.

¶59

Sd/JUDGE

¶60

¶61

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16

Smt Mahadevamma v. Sri B Ramegowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Mahadevamma v. Sri B Ramegowda

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

Smt. H. Sarojamma Vs Smt. Rathnamma

Kum Harini Vs Smt Rajamma

Sri K K Shekar Vs Smt.Sundara K S

Jayamma Vs Sri. Siddalingaiah

Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma Vs Sri. Manjunatha Enterprises

M/S. Hazrath Ameerul Momeeneen Education and Vs Janab Mahamed Shafi