Allowed

Shobha W/O Basappa Alais Basavaraj Ullagaddi v. Vishwanath S/O Basavaraj Alias Basappa Ullagaddi

Karnataka HC20 Sept 2023WP/102309/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a writ petition challenging a Lok-Adalat compromise decree. The court set aside the decree and remanded the matter, finding sufficient prima facie materials demonstrating petitioners' rights that were bypassed in the compromise.

What did the court decide?

The compromise decree was set aside and the matter remanded to the Court below. Petitioners were allowed to come on record.

Shobha W/O Basappa Alais Basavaraj… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10888 WP No. 102309 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 102309 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHOBHA W/O. BASAPPA @ BASAVARAJ ULLAGADDI, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: SULAKERI, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN-587101.

¶10

RAGHAVENDRA S/O. BASAPPA @ BASAVARAJ ULLAGADDI, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: SULAKERI, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN-587101.

¶11

MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR

¶12

RAKSHITA D/O. BASAPPA @ BASAVARAJ ULLAGADDI, AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: SULAKERI, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN-587101.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI ANAND R. KOLLI, ADV. FOR SMT. BHAGYASHREE N.B., ADV.)

¶15

Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2023.09.25 10:56:13 +0530

¶16

AND:

¶17

VISHWANATH S/O. BASAVARAJ @ BASAPPA ULLAGADDI, AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: SULAKERI, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN-587101.

¶18

BASAMMA W/O. BASAVARAJ @ BASAPPA ULLAGADDI, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: SULAKERI, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN-587101.

¶19

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10888 WP No. 102309 of 2023

¶20

3. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, GULEDGUDD, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI K.S. PATIL, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2; SRI P.N. HATTI, HCGP FOR R3)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER ORDER/DIRECTION TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED LOK ADALAT COMPROMISE DECREED PASSED BY THE HON’BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC BADAMI IN O.S. NO.175/2021 DATED 25.06.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-F IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY; ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO ENTER THE NAME OF PETITIONERS IN THE RECORD OF RIGHTS PERTAINING TO SURVEY NO.48/2D 91/1A/2, 84/3K, 91/2B, CONSEQUENTLY BY DELETING THE NAME OF RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2 IN THE RECORD OF RIGHTS VIDE ANNEXURE-H, H1, H2, H3 RESPECTIVELY IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Captioned petition is filed questioning the compromise

¶27

recorded by the Lok-Adalat in O.S.No.175/2021. Respondent No.1 filed a suit against his father Basavaraj, who was serving in Army and respondent No.2 by contending that he is a son born in the wedlock of respondent No.2 with one Basavaraj, who was arrayed as defendant No.1 in O.S.No.175/2021.

¶28

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10888 WP No. 102309 of 2023

¶29

Pending suit, it appears defendant No.1-Basavaraj died. Respondents 1 and 2 filed compromise petition and matter is compromised before the Lok-Adalat.

¶30

Petitioner No.1 claims that she is legally wedded wife of original defendant No.1-Basavaraj and has placed on record the pension details vide Annexure-A. Placing reliance on Annexure-A, petitioner No.1 claims that she is legally wedded wife of defendant No.1-Basavaraj and therefore, she has seriously disputed the status of respondent No.2 and also respondent No.1. If these significant details are looked into, then I am of the view that respondents 1 and 2 on account of death of defendant No.1 could not have entered into compromise. The petitioners have placed sufficient materials on record to prima facie demonstrate that they have a claim against defendant No.1-Basavaraj. Therefore, the compromise decree, in all probability, affects the right of the petitioners. The question as to who is legally wedded wife of defendant No.1-Basavaraj needs full-fledged trial. Therefore, I am of the view that the compromise decree recorded in O.S.No.175/2021 is not sustainable. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶31

¶32

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10888 WP No. 102309 of 2023

¶33

ORDER

¶34

i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶35

ii) The compromise decree passed in O.S.No.175/2021 recorded by the Lok-Adalat is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Court below.

¶36

iii) Since the parties are represented by their respective counsels, they are directed to appear before the Court below on 30.10.20223 without expecting any further summons from the Courts.

¶37

iv) The petitioners are entitled to come on record in the said suit.

¶38

v) All contentions are kept open.

¶39

vi) In view of disposal of the petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly.

¶40

YAN,

¶41

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9

¶42

Sd/JUDGE

Shobha W/O Basappa Alais Basavaraj Ullagaddi v. Vishwanath S/O Basavaraj Alias Basappa Ullagaddi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shobha W/O Basappa Alais Basavaraj Ullagaddi v. Vishwanath S/O Basavaraj Alias Basappa Ullagaddi

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

Usha W/O Ramachandra Naik Vs Cheief Executive Officer

Abdul Salam Vs the General Manager

Rajkumar S/O Mohanlal Khattar Vs Sarabi W/O Badesab Jawalgera

Sri Nitesh Shetty Vs State of Karnataka

Kumari Vijayalaxmi D/O. Ramrao Tatti Vs the Director

Deepali D/O Krishnarao Modagekar Vs the Belgaum Urban Development Authority