Sri Sriranga Iyengar Vs P Srinivasan

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7755 WP No. 8255 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 8255 OF 2018 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI.SRIRANGA IYENGAR S/O SRI.M.KRISHNAMACHAR AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.43/33 59^TH B CROSS, 4^TH N BLOCK T MAIN, RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE-560010.

¶9

K RAJAN @ RAJAN IYENGAR SINCE DEAD REP BY HIS LR’S

¶10

SMT. K JAYALAKSHMI

¶11

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

W/O SRI K RAJAN @ RAJAN IYENGAR AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS.

¶13

SRI KRISHNA MURTHY R S/O SRI K RAJAN @ RAJAN IYENGAR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

¶14

SRI. SRINIVASAN R S/O SRI K RAJAN @ RAJAN IYENGAR AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

¶15

SRI GOPINATH R S/O SRI. K RAJAN @ RAJAN IYENGAR AGED ABOUT 46 YERS

¶16

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7755 WP No. 8255 of 2018

¶17

ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.49 WEST ANJANEYA TEMLE ROAD BASAVANAGUDI BENGALURU-560 004.

¶18

…PETITIONERS

¶19

(BY SRI. S V BHAT .,ADVOCATE)

¶20

AND:

¶21

P SRINIVASAN SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR.

¶22

SMT P SUJATHA D/O SRI K PARTHASARTHY IYENGAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT NO.1/13A SRI. VENUGOALASWAMY TEMPLE STREET THALLY POST THALLY DENKANAKOTE TALUK DHARMAPURI DISTRICT TAMIL NADU-635118.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI. RAMACHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R2: R1 IS DEAD, R2 IS TREATED AS LR OF R1 V/O DATED: 25.08.2021)

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.02.2018, ON INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION (IA 8) IN FDP.184/2010 IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY, (CCCH 2), AT ANNEXURE-K AND ETC.

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7755 WP No. 8255 of 2018

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

This writ petition is filed by the respondents in F.D.P.No.184/2010, challenging the order dated 03.02.2018 passed on IA No.8 by the I Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-2), Bengaluru, whereby the court has ordered for public auction of the suit schedule property.

¶30

After service of notice in this matter, the parties have agreed for a settlement and they have filed a joint memo before this Court. The same is taken on record. .

¶31

The parties are present before the Court and

¶32

submit that they have agreed for the compromise, without any volition or duress from anybody.

¶33

The joint memo is extracted below:

¶34

“JOINT MEMO

¶35

The petitioners and the respondent beg to submit as follows:

¶36

1. The above petition arises out of a final decree proceedings in a suit of partition. The order under challenge is an order on I.A.No.8 in the final decree

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:7755 WP No. 8255 of 2018

¶39

proceedings for partition in FDP No.184/2010, wherein the Trial Court has been pleased to order for selling of the schedule property by public auction.

¶40

2. The parties submit that the property in question is a residential property having only ground floor and situated in Rajajinagar I stage, Bangalore. Land area of the property measures only 54 feet x 44 feet. It is submitted that this Hon'ble Court by order dated 05-02-2025 has fixed the price of the property at Rs.15,000/- and directed the parties to file joint memo indicating the terms of sale etc. by 07-02-2025; however on 07-02-2025, the respondent has identified one Sri. Ashok Kumar as the purchaser and kept him present before the court and he has agreed to purchase the schedule property at Rs.15,500/- per sq.ft. and all the parties have agreed to sell the property to him for the said rate and posted the above case to to-day for filing joint memo in this regard.

¶41

3. Now as the petitioners, again after deliberations with the family members & the sentiment attached to the property, are interested to retain the property in the family & are willing to purchase the property at Rs. 15,500/- per s.ft. in terms of the right reserved to them in RFA No. 1838/2010 and respondent has no objection for the same.

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7755 WP No. 8255 of 2018

¶43

4. The petitioners have filed affidavit giving the details of the papers/documents required for the purpose of registration of relinquishment deed by the respondent and time schedule within which they would pay the amount agreed to the respondent and the respondent is agreeable for the same and would fully co-operate with the petitioners in securing the relevant documents required for registration of the relinquishment deed.

¶44

WHEREFORE, it is prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to record the above terms and pass such other orders as may be necessary in the circumstances of the case.”

¶45

As per the joint memo, the second respondent herein, i.e., Smt.P.Sujata has agreed to sell her share in favour of the first petitioner – Sriranga Iyengar and the legal representatives of the second petitioner for a sum of Rs.15,500/- per sq.ft.

¶46

In view of the above, the following order is passed:

¶47

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶48

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:7755 WP No. 8255 of 2018

¶49

(ii) The order, dated 03.02.2018, passed on IA No.8 in FDP No.184/2010 by the I Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-2), Bengaluru is set aside.

¶50

(iii) The FDP Court is directed to dispose of the final decree proceedings on the basis of the joint memo filed by the parties and pass final decree proceedings as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶51

(iv) In view of disposal of the main petition, all pending applications stand disposed of.

¶52

Sd/(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

¶53

CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61

Sri Sriranga Iyengar v. P Srinivasan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sriranga Iyengar v. P Srinivasan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Vasudeva Madhyastha, Vs Smt. Prabhavathi

Sri Manjunatha Reddy Vs Smt Gopamma

Sri. Chethan C C Vs Sri G Manoj Kumar

Smt Lingarajamma Vs Nagarathnamma

Sri Ravi Kumar K T Vs Sri Krishna Naik

Sri. C. R. Sathyanarayana Vs Sri. C. S. Sharath Kumar