Basappa S/O Revaneppa Marinagammanavara Vs Hiriyavva Alias Neelava W/O Annapap Sappali

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8252-DB RFA No. 100185 of 2015 C/W RFA No. 100050 of 2023

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF JULY 2025

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

¶8

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.100185 OF 2015 (PAR/POS) C/W REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.100050 OF 2023

¶9

IN RFA NO.100185 OF 2015: BETWEEN:

¶10

BASAPPA S/O. REVANEPPA MARINAGAMMANAVARA, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE, TQ: RANEBENNUR-581115,

¶11

DIST: HAVERI.

¶12

HANUMANTAPPA S/O. REVANEPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s.,

¶13

Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR

¶14

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.07.09 10:15:05 +0530

¶15

2(A). RATNAVVA W/O. HANUMANTAPPA MARINAGAMMANAVARA, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE (NEAR MARUTI TEMPLE), TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.

¶16

2(B). MANJUNATH S/O. HANUMANTAPPA MARINAGAMMANAVARA, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE (NEAR MARUTI TEMPLE), TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.

¶17

2(C). NEELAMMA W/O. VEERANAGOUDA NIMBEGONDI, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE

¶18

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8252-DB RFA No. 100185 of 2015 C/W RFA No. 100050 of 2023

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

(NEAR MARUTI TEMPLE),

¶21

TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.

¶22

2(D). RAVIKUMAR S/O. HANUMANTAPPA MARINAGAMMANAVARA, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE (NEAR MARUTI TEMPLE), TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.

¶23

MALLAPPA S/O. REVANEPPA MARINAGAMMANAVARA, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE, TQ: RANEBENNUR-581115, DIST: HAVERI.

¶24

…APPELLANTS

¶25

(BY SRI. B.S.KAMATE, ADVOCATE)

¶26

AND:

¶27

HIRIYAVVA @ NEELAVVA W/O. ANNAPPA SAPALI, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O. HIREBIDARI VILLAGE, TQ: RANEBENNUR-581115, DIST: HAVERI.

¶28

ANASUYA W/O. IRAPPA ALADAKATTI AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WORKS, R/O. BANNIMATTI VILLAGE, TQ: HOOVINAHADAGALI-5832, DIST: BELLARY.

¶29

NIRMALA W/O. RAMESHAPPA BADANIKAYI AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WORKS, R/O. GULGUNJI VILLAGE, TQ: HAVERI-581110, DIST:HAVERI.

¶30

…RESPONDENTS

¶31

(BY SRI. PRUTHVIRAJ P.HITTALAMANI, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2; NOTICE TO R3 IS SERVED)

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8252-DB RFA No. 100185 of 2015 C/W RFA No. 100050 of 2023

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 06.07.2015, PASSED IN O.S.NO.59/2012, ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, RANEBENNUR, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR PARTITION & SEPARATE POSSESSION.

¶35

IN RFA NO.100050 OF 2023: BETWEEN:

¶36

BASAPPA S/O. REVANEPPA MARINAGAMMANAVARA, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE, TQ: RANEBENNUR-581115, DIST: HAVERI.

¶37

HANUMANTAPPA S/O. REVANEPPA MARINAGAMMANAVARA, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s.,

¶38

2(A). RATNAVVA W/O. HANUMANTAPPA MARINAGAMMANAVARA, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE (NEAR MARUTI TEMPLE), TALUK: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.

¶39

2(B). MANJUNATH S/O. HANUMANTAPPA MARINAGAMMANAVARA, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE (NEAR MARUTI TEMPLE), TALUK: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.

¶40

2(C). NEELAMMA W/O. VEERANAGOUDA NIMBEGONDI MARINAGAMMANAVARA, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE (NEAR MARUTI TEMPLE), TALUK: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.

¶41

2(D). RAVIKUMAR S/O. HANUMANTAPPA MARINAGAMMANAVARA, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

¶42

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8252-DB RFA No. 100185 of 2015 C/W RFA No. 100050 of 2023

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE (NEAR MARUTI TEMPLE), TALUK: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.

¶45

MALLAPPA S/O. REVANEPPA MARINAGAMMANAVARA, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KAMADOD VILLAGE, TQ: RANEBENNUR-581115, DIST: HAVERI.

¶46

…APPELLANTS

¶47

(BY SRI. B.S.KAMATE, ADVOCATE)

¶48

AND:

¶49

HIRIYAVVA @ NEELAVA W/O. ANNAPAP SAPALI, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O. HIREBIDARI VILLAGE, TQ: RANEBENNUR-581115, DIST: HAVERI.

¶50

ANASUYA W/O. IRAPPA ALADAKATTI AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORKS, R/O. BANNIMATTI VILLAGE, TQ: HOOVINAHADAGALI-5832, DIST: BELLARY.

¶51

NIRMALA W/O. RAMESHAPPA BADANIKAYI AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WORKS, R/O. GULGUNJI VILLAGE, TQ: HAVERI-581110, DIST: HAVERI.

¶52

…RESPONDENTS

¶53

(BY SRI. PRUTHVIRAJ P.HITTALAMANI, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2)

¶54

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 06.07.2015, PASSED IN O.S.NO.59/2012, ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, RANEBENNUR, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR PARTITION & SEPARATE POSSESSION.

¶55

THESE APPEALS 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

¶56

5 -

¶57

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8252-DB RFA No. 100185 of 2015 C/W RFA No. 100050 of 2023

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶60

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

¶61

RFA.No.100185/2015 is filed by defendant No.1, deceased defendant No.2 and defendant No.3 against the judgment and decree dated 06.07.2015 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranebennur (for short, ‘trial Court’) by which, the trial Court declared that the plaintiff is entitled to 1/6^th share in the suit schedule properties.

¶62

RFA.No.100050/2023 is filed by the above said defendants challenging the very same judgment and decree in terms of which, the trial Court negatived the counter claim of the defendants that they had succeeded to suit schedule properties in terms of the Will dated 20.08.1984 (Ex.D.10) executed by Smt.Dyamavva.

¶63

When these appeals were listed for final hearing, the parties have filed a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The relevant portion of the same reads as under:

¶64

6 -

¶65

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8252-DB RFA No. 100185 of 2015 C/W RFA No. 100050 of 2023

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

“3. It is submitted that in view of the settlement arrived at between parties, the Appellants have paid the following amounts to the Respondents no. 1 to 3 as under:

¶68

1) Respondent. No.1/ Hiriyavva @ Neelavva, W/o, Annappa Sapali, a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-(Five Lakh only) by way of DD No.807568 dated 23.06.2025 drawn on Yes Bank Ltd Ranebennur.

¶69

2) Respondent. No.2/ Anasuya W/o. Irappa Aladakatti a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-(Five Lakh only) by way of DD No.135157 dated 01.06.2025 drawn on Punjab National Bank Ranebennur.

¶70

3) Respondent. No.3/ Nirmala W/o. Rameshappa Badanikayi, a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-(Five Lakh only) by way of DD No.006579 dated 01.07.2025 drawn on IDBI Bank Ranebennur.

¶71

The Respondent no.1 to 3 have acknowledged the receipt of the Demand Drafts and have given up their claim in all the suit schedule properties and hereby admit the absolute ownership of the Appellants over the suit schedule properties.

¶72

For the reasons stated above the Appellants and Respondents humbly pray that the Appeal may kindly be disposed of in terms of this compromise petition and a decree may kindly be drawn in the above terms in the interest of justice.

¶73

It is stated that the above terms of settlements are read over and explained to the parties in the language known to them and after understanding the same the parties have agreed to the compromise voluntarily without any force and undue influence and have signed the compromise petition by them.”

¶74

7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8252-DB RFA No. 100185 of 2015 C/W RFA No. 100050 of 2023

¶75

HC-KAR

¶76

In terms of the aforesaid compromise, the defendants-appellants have paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/(Rupees Five Lakh only) each to respondents No.1, 2 and 3 towards full and final settlement of all their claims in respect of the suit schedule properties.

¶77

The parties are present and they all accept the terms of the compromise.

¶78

Learned counsel for appellants-defendants

¶79

No.1, 2 and 3 has handed over three demand drafts mentioned in the compromise to respondents No.1, 2 and

¶80

Since the parties have amicably settled the dispute amongst themselves, the same is accepted as it is not opposed to law. In token of acceptance of terms of the compromise, the parties have affixed their signatures to the order sheet of this Court.

¶81