Disposed

Sri Venkatesha Naidu v. Sri P Sanjeeva Murthy Rao

Karnataka HC2 Nov 2023RFA/870/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a first appeal against a money recovery decree. The Court accepted a Joint Memo of amicable settlement where appellants agreed to pay Rs.10 lakhs. The Court directed release of deposited funds and modification of the decree accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed by modifying the impugned judgment and decree. Deposited Rs.8,30,000 and court fee Rs.81,435 released to respondents; balance Rs.88,565 directed to be paid by appellants on or before 2

Sri Venkatesha Naidu Vs Sri P Sanjeeva Murthy Rao — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:39021 RFA No. 870 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.870 OF 2019 (MON)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI VENKATESHA NAIDU NOW AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS S/O J M NAIDU

¶8

SMT. R VASANTHA AND NOT VASANTHAMMA NOW AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS W/O SRI. VENKATESHA NAIDU

¶9

BOTH ARE R/AT VG FLOOR MILL AND VG TRAVELS, NO.90/5, 26^TH MAIN, 1^ST STAGE , 2^ND MAIN, BTM LAYOUT, BANGALORE 560 076.

¶10

…APPELLANTS

¶11

(BY SRI. IMRAN PASHA, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

SRI P SANJEEVA MURTHY RAO SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

¶15

SRI. GURURAJA P S AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O LATE P SANJEEVA MURTHY RAO

¶16

SMT. T R NANDINI DATTA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS D/O LATE P SANJEEVA MURTHY RAO

¶17

SMT. P S MANJU BHASHINI AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS W/O LATE P SANJEEVA MURTHY RAO

¶18

ALL ARE R/AT OPP TO RAGHAVENDRA SWAMY MUTT NEAR RAILWAY GATE, TUMKUR.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. C N SATYANARAYANA SHASTRY, ADVOCATE)

¶21

¶22

NC: 2023:KHC:39021 RFA No. 870 of 2019

¶23

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC AGAINST JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.01.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.4665/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY.

¶24

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

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

This appeal by the defendants in O.S.No.4665/2002 on the file of the XXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 31.01.2019 passed by the Trial Court, whereby the said suit filed by the respondents – plaintiffs was decreed in their favour directing the appellants – defendants to pay a sum of Rs.3,45,200/- together with interest at 18% per annum from the date of the suit till payment within a period of three months, failing which the appellants have been directed to pay interest at 24% per annum for the delayed period.

¶27

A Joint Memo is filed by both sides reporting amicable settlement between the parties. The said Joint Memo is signed by appellant No.1 and respondent No.1 as well as their respective counsel, who have identified the parties and all of them are

¶28

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:39021 RFA No. 870 of 2019

¶29

physically present before this Court today and admit having filed the aforesaid Joint Memo.

¶30

As per the settlement arrived at between the parties, the appellants have agreed to pay a total sum of Rs.10 lakhs to the respondents towards full and final settlement / satisfaction of the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court as well as all the claims of the respondents – plaintiffs against the appellants. The details of the total sum of Rs.10 lakhs agreed to be paid by the appellants to the respondents are as under:

¶31

a) Rs.8,30,000/- which has been deposited by

¶32

the appellants before this Court in the present appeal.

¶33

b) Rs.81,435/- which is the Court Fee paid by the appellants on the Memorandum of Appeal.

¶34

c) Rs.88,565/- which will be paid by the appellants in favour of the respondents on or before 20.11.2023.

¶35

The parties have agreed that the aforesaid sum of

¶36

Rs.8,30,000/- which is in deposit before this Court shall be released / disbursed in favour of the respondents forthwith. So also, it is agreed that the Court Fee of Rs.81,435/- paid on the

¶37

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:39021 RFA No. 870 of 2019

¶38

Memorandum of Appeal shall be released / disbursed in favour of the respondents forthwith. The appellants have also agreed to pay the balance sum of Rs.88,565/- to the respondents on or before 20.11.2023.

¶39

Being satisfied that the settlement / compromise entered into between the parties is lawful, I deem it just and appropriate to accept the Joint Memo and dispose of the appeal by suitably modifying the impugned judgment and decree in terms of the Joint Memo of settlement entered into between the parties.

¶40

6. In the result, I pass the following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

(i) Appeal is disposed of in terms of the Joint

¶43

Memo filed by the parties.

¶44

(ii) The impugned judgment and decree dated 31.01.2019 passed in O.S.No.4665/2002 by the XXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is modified in terms of the Joint Memo filed by the parties.

¶45

(iii) Registry is directed to release a sum of Rs.8,30,000/- which has been deposited by the appellants

¶46

¶47

NC: 2023:KHC:39021 RFA No. 870 of 2019

¶48

before this Court in the present appeal in favour of the respondents forthwith without any delay;

¶49

(iv) Registry is also directed to release a sum of

¶50

Rs.81,435/- which is the Court Fee paid on the Memorandum of Appeal in favour of the respondents forthwith without any delay.

¶51

(v) The appellants shall pay the balance sum of Rs.88,565/- to the respondents on or before 20.11.2023.

¶52

(vi) Registry to draw decree accordingly.

¶53

Sd/JUDGE

¶54

¶55

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2

Sri Venkatesha Naidu v. Sri P Sanjeeva Murthy Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Venkatesha Naidu v. Sri P Sanjeeva Murthy Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Munihanumakka @ Hanumakka Vs Smt. Shilpa G N

The Loordes Nursery and Primary School Vs Sri. Somashekar

Kumar S Vs Manager

Mrs Shakira Begum Vs M/S Sri Nakoda Construction Ltd.

Sri.B.N. Nanjundaswamy Vs Smt. N Ranjini

Sri.B.N Nanjundaswamy Vs Smt. N. Ranjini