K Hema Prakash Vs Kashi v Manjunth — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

K Hema Prakash Vs Kashi v Manjunth — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn; appellants 1 to 3 permitted to work out their remedy in FDP No.07/2007 before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Arsikere pursuant to the settlement agreement dated 05.06.2025 with respondent No.1; rights of respondent No.2 unaffected; LRs of deceased respondent No.3 to be brought on record in the FDP proceedings if necessary.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appeal may be permitted to be withdrawn by the appellants on the basis of the settlement agreement dated 05.06.2025 entered into between appellant Nos.1 to 3 and respondent No.1. +2 more

Court's answer

The Miscellaneous Second Appeal No.21 of 2020 is dismissed as withdrawn on the memo filed by the learned counsel for the appellants.

Ratio / Principle

The appellants may work out their remedy before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Arsikere in FDP No.07/2007 pursuant to the settlement dated 05.06.2025.

Key takeaways

The agreement entered into between appellant Nos.1 to 3 and respondent No.1 would not affect the rights of respondent No.2, who is not a party to the agreement.ratio¶45
I.A.Nos.1 to 3 of 2024 (to bring the LRs of the deceased respondent No.3 on record) do not survive for consideration before this court; the LRs can, if necessary, be brought on record in the FDP proceedings.ratio¶50

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (H.P. Sandesh, J.), decided 9 June 2025 — MSA No.21 of 2020, a second appeal under Section 100 CPC challenging the R.A.No.14/2018 judgment and decree dated 25.04.2019 of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan, which had allowed the first appeal, set aside the FDP judgment and decree dated 05.07.2016 (FDP No.7/2007, Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Arasikere, arising from a Section 54 CPC petition) and directed restoration of the FDP with opportunity for additional evidence and passing of final decree, subject to payment of court fee. On coming up for orders, counsel for appellants 1–3 filed a memo to withdraw the appeal, placing on record a settlement agreement dated 05.06.2025 between appellants 1–3 and respondent No.1 and seeking liberty to work out the remedy in FDP No.07/2007. The court observed that respondent No.2, not being a party to the agreement, was unaffected by it; held that I.A.Nos.1–3/2024 for bringing the LRs of the deceased respondent No.3 (Dr. K.V. Ramesh) on record did not survive, as they could be joined in the FDP if necessary; and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:19514 MSA No. 21 of 2020

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 21 OF 2020

BETWEEN:

K. HEMA PRAKASH W/O LATE K.V. PRAKASH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

K. SHREYAS PRAKASH S/O K.V. PRAKASH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

SHRUTHI PRAKASH D/O K V PRAKASH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

APPELLANTS 1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT M/S. EGG CENTRE NO.147, MAKAI COMPLEX A R COMPOUND, MYSORE ROAD BENGALURU-560 026.

…APPELLANTS

(BY SMT. KSHAMA NARGUND, ADVOCATE)

AND:

KASHI V. MANJUNTH S/O LATE VISHWANATH SHETTY AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O 4033, EMERALD ISLE SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95135 USA

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:19514 MSA No. 21 of 2020

HC-KAR

REPRESENTED BY HIS P.A.HOLDER SRI.VEERANARAYANA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O LATE R.V.GOPALAKRISHNA SHETTY NICE ICE SINKEES PIZZA CORNER No.162/2, 3^RD MAIN, P.J.EXTENSION DAVANAGERE-577001.

K.V. SHASHIKUMAR R/O B.H.ROAD ARASIKERE

DR. K.V. RAMESH S/O LATE KASHI VISHWANATH SHETTY AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/O DOOR NO.16 ‘KASHI NIVASA’ GAVIPURAM EXTENTION, 2^ND CROSS BENGALURU-560019.

H.K. SHANTA KESHAVA W/O H.V. KESHAVAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS BALAJI ELECTRONICS DODDAPET TIPTUR-572114.

B.S. RAJESHWARI W/O SHIVAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O DOOR NO.77/2, 3RD MAIN ROAD, HANMANTHANAGAR, BENGALURU-560019.

JAYALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O SUBHASH NAGAR, ARASIKERE-573103.

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:19514 MSA No. 21 of 2020

HC-KAR

NAGA VISHNESH S/O SHIVAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/O SHANTI NIVASA B.H. ROAD ARASIKERE-573103.

TAHSILDAR B.H. ROAD ARASIKERE-573103.

TALUK SURVEYOR ARASIKERE-573103.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER D.C. OFFICE HASSAN-573201.

THE CHIEF OFFICER MUNICIPALITY ARASIKERE-573103.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. A. SAMPATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI.T.H.AVIN, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. GURUSWAMY B.S., AGA FOR R8 TO 10; SMT. VIDYA SELVAMONY, ADVOCATE FOR R11; R4 TO R7 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.04.2019 PASSED IN R.A.NO.14/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.07.2016 PASSED IN FDP NO.7/2007ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ARASIKERE, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 54 OF CPC.THE APPELLATE COURT DIRECTED THE TRIAL COURT TO RESTORE THE FDP NO.7/2007 ON ITS BOARD AND PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTIES TO ADDUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, IF PARTIES DESIRE, THEN PROCEED TO PASS THE

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:19514 MSA No. 21 of 2020

HC-KAR

FINAL DECREE AS PER OBSERVATION MADE SUPRA, SUBJECT TO PAY NECESSARY COURT FEE BY APPELLANT/PETITIONER.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

ORAL JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellants files

memo seeking permission of this court to withdraw the appeal. It is stated in the memo that the appellant Nos.1 to 3 and respondent No.1 have entered into settlement on the advice of the well wishers and copy of the settlement agreement dated 05.06.2025 is also placed on record along with the memo and seeks permission to workout the remedy before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Arsikere in FDP No.07/2007.

It appears that respondent No.2 is not a party to the agreement and whatever the agreement entered between the appellant Nos.1 to 3 and respondent No.1 would not affect the rights of the respondent No.2.

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:19514 MSA No. 21 of 2020

HC-KAR

The learned counsel for the appellants filed an

application to bring the LRs’ of deceased respondent No.3 on record as R3(A to C). In view of filing of memo seeking permission to withdraw and also sought permission to workout the remedy in the FDP and if necessary, they can

be brought on record in FDP proceedings. Hence, I.A.No.1/2024, I.A.No.2/2024 and I.A.No.3/2024 are not survives for consideration before this court. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Sd/(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

RHS

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1