Ramanna @ Ramappa S/O. Basappa Hallad Vs Ajaykumar S/O. Ramanna @ Ramappa Hallad — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ramanna @ Ramappa S/O. Basappa Hallad Vs Ajaykumar S/O. Ramanna @ Ramappa Hallad — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Suit O.S.No.168/2018 and the appeal disposed of in terms of the compromise: appellant No.3 (Akshay Petroleum, the purchaser of the suit property) to pay Rs.8,00,000 to the plaintiff/Respondent No.1 towards his alleged share in full and final settlement, through two post-dated cheques (No.878927 dated 17.09.2025 and No.878928 dated 17.11.2025) drawn on State Bank of India, Lokapur branch; plaintiff/Respondent No.1 to accept the amount, place it in fixed deposit for his two children, and relinquish all right, title and interest over the suit schedule properties without initiating further legal proceedings.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Regular First Appeal against the partition decree in O.S.No.168/2018 should be disposed of in terms of the compromise petition filed by the parties under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC. +1 more

Court's answer

The terms of the compromise being perused and found not opposed to any law, the compromise is accepted; the parties having signed the compromise in token of acceptance, the suit O.S.No.168/2018 as well as the appeal are disposed of in terms of the compromise.

Ratio / Principle

The terms of the compromise are lawful (not opposed to any law) and are accepted, the parties having affixed their signatures in token of acceptance.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular First Appeal under Section 96(1) CPC by defendants Nos.1 and 10 against the judgment and decree dated 20.12.2019 of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mudhol in O.S.No.168/2018, whereby the suit for partition was decreed and the plaintiff was declared entitled to a 1/6th share in the suit schedule properties. At the stage of final hearing, the parties reported settlement through a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC: appellant No.3 (Proprietor/Managing Partner, Akshay Petroleum, the purchaser of the suit property) agreed to pay Rs.8,00,000 to the plaintiff/Respondent No.1 towards his alleged share as full and final settlement, by two post-dated cheques bearing Nos.878927 (dated 17.09.2025) and 878928 (dated 17.11.2025) drawn on State Bank of India, Lokapur branch, undertaking their realisation on the due dates failing which he would forfeit the benefits of the compromise. The plaintiff agreed to deposit the amount in fixed deposit in the names of his two children, relinquished all right, title and interest in the suit schedule properties, and undertook not to initiate any further legal proceedings against the appellants. Holding that the terms were not opposed to any law and noting the presence and consent of the plaintiff and defendants Nos.1, 7, 9 and 10, the Bench (judgment per R. Nataraj, J.; coram R. Nataraj and Rajesh Rai K, JJ.) accepted the compromise and disposed of the suit as well as the appeal in terms thereof.

1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8875-DB RFA No. 100029 of 2020

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.100029 OF 2020 (PAR/POS)

BETWEEN:

RAMANNA @ RAMAPPA S/O. BASAPPA HALLAD, AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: SUBHAS NAGAR, LOKAPUR-587122, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

HANAMANT S/O. MELAGIRIYAPPA KONNUR, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: KITTUR-591115, TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

Digitally signedbyYASHAVANTNARAYANKAR
YASHAVANTNARAYANKAR Location: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKADHARWADBENCHDHARWADDate:2025.07.2110:20:29+0530

PROPRIETOR/MANAGING PARTNER AKSHAY PETROLEUM, BELAGAVI ROAD, LOKAPUR-587122, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

(BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE)

…APPELLANTS

AND:

AJAYKUMAR S/O. RAMANNA @ RAMAPPA HALLAD, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: NEAR RBG HIGH SCHOOL, SUBHAS NAGAR, LOKAPUR-587122, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

SMT.KAMALA W/O. RAMANNA @ RAMAPPA HALLAD, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: LOKAPUR-587122, NOW C/O. SMT.MANJULA GOLLALEPPA DYAMAGOND,

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8875-DB RFA No. 100029 of 2020

HC-KAR

AT: POST : SUNGATHAN, TQ: SINDAGI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586123.

SMT.MANJULA W/O. GOLLALEPPA DYAMAGOND, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: AT: POST : SUNGATHAN, TQ: SINDAGI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586123.

SMT.ANJALI W/O. SUNILKUMAR MALAKAI, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: OPP. NEAR VRL OFFICE, MARATHA COLONY-580008, DHARWAD.

VIJAY S/O. RAMANNA @ RAMAPPA HALLAD, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: NEAR RBG HIGH SCHOOL, SUBHAS NAGAR, LOKAPUR-587122, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

MALLAPPA S/O. BHIMAPPA JAINER, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,, R/O: JADAR ARALIKATTI-587122, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

MANAGER INDIAN OIL CORPORATION BENGALURU, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KHANAPUR ROAD, TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI-590006.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. GIRISH A.YADAWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2, R3, R6 AND R7-ARE NOTICE SERVED; R4-NOTICE IS HELD SUFFICIENT)

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96(1) OF CPC., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 20.12.2019 PASSED IN O.S.N.168/2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MUDHOL AND DISMISS THE SUIT BEARING O.S.NO.168/2018 IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

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

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8875-DB RFA No. 100029 of 2020

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ)

The defendant Nos.1 and 10 in OS No.168/2018 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mudhol, have filed this appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 20.12.2019 by which the trial Court decreed the suit for partition and declared that the plaintiff is entitled to 1/6^th share in the suit schedule properties. This appeal was admitted and when it was taken up for final hearing, the parties have reported a settlement by filing a petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC.

The terms of the compromise reads as follows:

A. The parties are referred to their original ranking in the suit for the better understanding.

B. The appellant No.3/defendant No.9 is the purchaser of the suit property and he has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.8,00,000-00 to the plaintiff/ Respondent No.1, towards his alleged share, as full and final settlement of claim/ dispute and the plaintiff/respondent No 1 has agreed to accept the same towards full and final settlement. In lieu of above, the appellant No.3/defendant No.7 is handing over two post-dated cheques bearing No.878927 drawn on State Bank of India at branch Lokapur No.1404 Kadarakoppa road Lokapur-587112, dated:17.09.2025

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8875-DB RFA No. 100029 of 2020

HC-KAR

and cheque bearing No.878928 drawn on State Bank of India at branch Lokapur No.1404 Kadarakoppa road Lokapur587112, dated:17.11.2025 to the plaintiff/ respondent No.1, which the respondent No.1 is entitled to withdraw the said amount on its date of due. The appellant No.3 undertakes with regard to realization of the said cheques on the date as mentioned on the said cheques, failing which the appellant No.3 is not entitled to get the benefits under the present compromise petition.

C. Further the plaintiff/respondent No1 has relinquished his rights in respect of the suit properties by accepting the above said amount i.e., Rs.8,00,000-00 from the appellants.

D. Further the plaintiff/respondent No.1 has agreed to keep the said amount in the fixed deposit in the name of his two children in any Nationalised Bank to earn interest.

E. The Plaintiff/Respondent has amicably agreed that, they will not in future disturb the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Defendants/ Appellants and have no right, title and interest over the suit schedule properties. F. In the view of above terms and conditions of compromise, the Plaintiff/Respondent No.1 undertakes that he will not initiate any legal proceedings against the Appellants in respect of suit schedule properties.

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8875-DB RFA No. 100029 of 2020

HC-KAR

G. All the parties have agreed that they would not interfere with each other, or raise any quarrel in regard to the present dispute. Further all the parties have agreed to maintain peace and abide by the law and order and the conditions mentioned above.

H. The above settlement arrived at between the appellant and respondent is with free will, wish and free consent of the appellant and respondent without any force, coercion and undue influence made against each other. The contents of the present settlement have been read over to the appellant and respondent in the language known to them and have clearly understood the contents of present settlement and have amicably with free consent put their signatures on the present compromise petition.”

The plaintiff-respondent No.1 is present with his

wife Smt.Vijayalakshmi, the defendant No.1, 7, 9 and 10 are present. They agreed to the terms mentioned in the compromise. As per the terms of compromise, the plaintiff would received a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- from the defendant No.10 towards the full and final settlement of his claim in respect of the suit properties.

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8875-DB RFA No. 100029 of 2020

HC-KAR

The terms of the compromise are perused and since, the same is not opposed to any law, the same is accepted. The parties have affixed their signature on the compromise in token of their acceptance of the terms of the compromise.

In view of the above, the compromise is accepted

and the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent No.1 in OS No.168/2018 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mudhol as well as this appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise.

SD/(R.NATARAJ) JUDGE

SD/(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE

PJ CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 24