The High Court of Karnataka accepted a compromise petition filed between appellants and respondent in Regular First Appeal No. 1564 of 2017. The parties settled the dispute regarding suit property sale consideration and terms of transfer.
Allow appeal in terms of compromise petition; dispose of pending interim applications; refund court fee to appellant No.1.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1564 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka
ALL ARE R/AT NO.808, 6TH CROSS 5TH MAIN, M.C.LAYOUT VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 040.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SAMANTH H S – ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SANGAMESH R B - ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI NARAPATHRAJ S/O GULAB CHAND AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT 18/8, 2ND FLOOR K.V.TEMPLE STREET 2ND CROSS ROAD SAWRASTRAPET BENGALURU-560 053.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SHASHANK S - ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S V SRINIVAS - ADVOCATE )
THIS RFA FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18TH JULY 2017 PASSED IN OS NO.7316/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXI-ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.
THIS RFA, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, K. SOMASHEKAR .J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 18.07.2017 passed in O.S.No.7316/2012, on the file of XXXI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-14). The suit in O.S.No.7316/2012 was initiated by the plaintiff against the defendants in respect of suit schedule property depicted therein. Accordingly, the Court having jurisdiction to deal with aforesaid original suit, rendered a judgment and decree. It is the said judgment
and decree which is under challenge in this appeal by urging
various grounds.
sum of Rs.20,09,000/(Rupees Twenty Lakhs Nine Thousand Only) before the trial Court vide acknowledgement dated 12.09.2017.
NC: 2024:KHC:16625-DB RFA No. 1564 of 2017
namely Smt.Gayathri as desired by all the Appellants at the time of the execution and registration of the sale deed in favour of the Respondent.
in the best interest of both the parties and it is also the only way to put an end to the long pending litigation and restore peace and harmony between the parties.
namely Smt Gayathri W/o Late M D Nagabhushan, on due identification.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
RJ / KS
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should accept a compromise petition filed between the appellant and respondent to settle the dispute regarding the suit schedule property.
Whether the appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure should be allowed based on the terms of the compromise.
Whether the court should direct the disposal of pending interim applications in light of the settlement.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
SMT GAYATHRI W/O LATE M.D.NAGABHUSAN AND OTHERS
SRI NARAPATHRAJ S/O GULAB CHAND
K.SOMASHEKAR
RAJESH RAI K
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
