Sri Nagaraju Vs Haavina Chikkanna

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., 1908 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.08.2021 PASSED IN OS.NO.548/2015 ON IA ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM., TUMAKURU, ALLOWING THE IA FILED UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11 (a) AND (d) OF CPC., FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶25

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:26415 RFA No. 1335 of 2021

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶28

Sri.Shrivatsa and Sri.P.V.Chandrashekar, learned counsels have filed vakalath on behalf of respondents No.3 and 4 respectively. The same are taken on record.

¶29

Heard Sri.Rajeshwara P.N and Sri.H.R.Narayana Rao, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri.Kashinath J.D, learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2, Sri.Shrivatsa, learned counsel for respondent No.3 and Sri.P.V.Chandrashekar, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

¶30

This Regular First Appeal is filed under section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’), against the judgment and decree dated 03.08.2021 passed in O.S.No.548/2015 on I.A filed under Order 7 Rule 11 (a) and (d) of CPC on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumakuru, rejecting the plaint of the plaintiff/appellant.

¶31

During the pendency of the appeal, both learned counsels submit that the parties have settled the dispute amicably and filed a joint compromise petition dated 16.07.2025 under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC read with Rule 39 of the Karnataka High Court Writ Proceeding Rules, 1977.

¶32

4 -

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:26415 RFA No. 1335 of 2021

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

The compromise petition is duly signed by the

¶36

appellant, respondents No.1 to 3 and their respective counsels. The averments of the compromise petition reads thus:

¶37

1. “The Appellant has filed the above Appeal challenging the Judgment and Decree dated 03.08.2021 passed in O.S No.548/2015 by the Hon’ble Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumakuru rejecting the plaint of the Appellant.

¶38

2. Sy.No.91 of Kempanadodderi Village, Kora Hobli, Tumkuru District totally measures 7 acres 36 guntas. Out of 7 acres 36 guntas, Appellant is claiming to be the owner of 2 acres 15 guntas of land in Sy.No.91 and Respondent No.3 is claiming to be the owner of 1 acre 35 guntas in Sy.No.91. The entire 7 acres 36 guntas in Sy.No.91 is acquired by Respondent No.4 vide Preliminary Notification dated 31.07.2006 and Final Notification dated 27.02.2007. The Appellant filed O.S No.548/2015 before the Hon’ble Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumakuru seeking declaration that he is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the Suit A Schedule Property and for Permanent Injunction restraining the Respondents No.1 and 2 from drawing the compensation amount and for other relief. The said Plaint in O.S No.548/2021 is rejected.

¶39

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:26415 RFA No. 1335 of 2021

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

Against the said Judgment and Decree, the present Appeal is filed.

¶42

3. The Respondents No.1 and 2 have filed W.P No.49188/2014 (LA-KIADB) seeking to quash the Preliminary Notificati on dated 31.07.2006 and Final Notification dated 27.02.2007. This Hon’ble Court vide final Order dated 17.06.2022 disposed of the said Petition directed the Respondent No.4 to reserve the proportionate entitlement in lieu of the acquired land in Vasantha Narasapura Industrial Area, II Phase in terms of the Government Order dated 23.02.2021.

¶43

4. That in respect of 7 acres 36 guntas of land acquired in Sy.No.91, the land owner is entitled for a developed site measuring 7915.42 Square meter as per Government Order dated 23.02.2021.

¶44

5. The Appellant and the Respondents No.1 to 3 have had discussions and amicably decided to settle this ongoing dispute. The Appellant and Respondents No.1 to 3 have agreed as follows:

¶45

(i) That out of developed area measuring 7915.42 square meter to be allotted by Respondent No.4 – KIADB, the Appellant is entitled for a developed area measuring 1,504 square meter and Respondents No.1 and 2 are entitled for a developed area measuring 3,205.71 square meters

¶46

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:26415 RFA No. 1335 of 2021

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

each. The plots to be allotted by KIADB is not allotted at different places for either of the parties as per the entitlement agreed hereunder, but as one single plot, then, the division of the plot would be such that the advantages and disadvantages in the Plot will be proportionately shared by the parties.

¶49

(ii) That Respondents No.1 and 2 are entitled for the compensation amount already deposited in respect of trees and malkies;

¶50

(iii) That out of the compensation amount to be awarded in respect of trees and malkies in future, the Appellant, Respondent No.1 & 2 jointly, and Respondent No.3 are entitled for 1/3^rd share each.

¶51

(iv) That the parties hereby agree that if there are any other proceedings or litigations by the Appellant and the Respondents against each other, both of them undertake to peruse them and agree that all the disputes are settled in terms of this Joint Compromise Petition.

¶52

Wherefore, the Appellant and the Respondents No.1 to 3 pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispose off the above Appeal by decreeing the suit in O.S No.548/2015 on the file of the Hon’ble Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumakuru, in terms of the above compromise petition, in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶53