Two cross appeals over suits for permanent injunction concerning suit schedule property were compromised. The appellants paid Rs.15,00,000 to the respondent, who agreed to forego his right over the property, and the court disposed of both appeals in terms of the joint compromise application and directed a decree to be drawn.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:42901 RFA No. 1101 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 1135 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
RFA NO. 1101 OF 2016 C/W RFA NO. 1135 OF 2016 (INJ)
IN RFA No.1101/2016
BETWEEN:
DR V NARAYANASWAMY S/O MUNINARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER SRI VENKATESH S/O B T VENKATARAMAIAH CORRECT AGE 59 YEARS NO 230, 18TH CROSS SADASHIVANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 080 …APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHANMUKHAPPA, ADV.)
AND:
Digitally signed by VEDAVATHI A K Location: High Court of Karnataka
(BY SRI. MANOJ ARADYA, ADV. FOR R1 & R2)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 96 OF CPC., JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.04.2016 PASSED IN O.S NO.3509/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH 15), BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.
NC: 2024:KHC:42901 RFA No. 1101 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 1135 of 2016
IN RFA NO.1135/2016
BETWEEN:
(BY SRI. SHANMUKHAPPA., ADV.)
AND:
SRI.V.RAMAIAH S/O R VENKATASWAMY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS PRESENT R/O NO.17, 18TH CROSS 50 FEET ITTAMADU MAIN ROAD T.G.LAYOUT, ITTAMADU BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE-560 085 ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. MANOJ ARADYA, ADV. FOR R1)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 96 OF CPC. AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.04.2016 PASSED IN OS.NO.3385/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
NC: 2024:KHC:42901 RFA No. 1101 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 1135 of 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT
RFA.No.1101/2016 is filed by the plaintiff for setting aside the dismissal of the suit in O.S.No.3509/2007, wherein he sought for an injunction and RFA.No.1135/2016 is filed by the same appellant and Mr.V.Venkatesh challenging the judgment and decree passed by the VIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-15) at Bengaluru in the clubbed common judgment dated 01.04.2016 for
having decreed the suit of the respondent plaintiff in O.S.No.3385/2007.
NC: 2024:KHC:42901 RFA No. 1101 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 1135 of 2016
appellants Dr.V.Narayanaswamy and V.Venkatesh in RFA.No.1135/2016 have agreed to pay a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- to respondent defendant V.Ramaiah.
The appellant No.1 said to be the owner and appellant No.2 said to be the Power of Attorney Holder. Accordingly, the appellants have paid Rs.10,00,000/by way of Cheque bearing No.594344 drawn on South Indian Bank, K.G.Road Branch, Bangalore on 17.09.2024 itself; Rs.2,00,000/- paid by way of Cash and Rs.3,00,000/- paid by way of Cheque bearing No.594343 drawn on South Indian Bank, K.G.Road Branch, Bangalore on 17.09.2024. The receipt of Rs.15,00,000/- is acknowledged by the respondentV.Ramaiah. The respondent has agreed to forego the right over the suit schedule property. Thereby the plaintiff/appellant No.1-Dr.V.Narayanaswamy has become the absolute owner in possession of the suit schedule property and the respondent has no objection
NC: 2024:KHC:42901 RFA No. 1101 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 1135 of 2016
for the appellant to get khatha transferred in his name
and enjoy the property as absolute owner thereof.
application are placed on record. The compromise is in accordance with law and the parties are permitted to
compromise their dispute. As such there is no impediment for this Court to dispose of the appeals in
terms of the compromise application.
ORDER
iii) No order as to costs.
Sd/(K.NATARAJAN) JUDGE
MKM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeals could be disposed of in terms of a joint compromise application filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Dr V Narayanaswamy
V Venkatesh
Sri V Ramaiah
Sri R Venkataswamy
K.NATARAJAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
