Sri Siddalingappa Vs Smt Prameela — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sri Siddalingappa Vs Smt Prameela — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of in terms of the Settlement Agreement; Memorandum of Settlement made part of the decree; pending interlocutory applications held to not survive.

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the amicable settlement reached between the parties through the Karnataka Mediation Centre and the Memorandum of Settlement filed under Section 89 of CPC, the Miscellaneous First Appeal against the rejection of I.A.Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.4984/2020 could be disposed of in terms of the Settlement Agreement.

Court's answer

In view of the Settlement Agreement arrived at between the parties before the Karnataka Mediation Centre, Bengaluru, nothing further survives for consideration in the appeal, and the appeal stands disposed of in terms of the Settlement Agreement.

Ratio / Principle

The Memorandum of Settlement shall form part of the decree.

Key takeaways

In view of the disposal of the appeal, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and pale into insignificance.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court (Pradeep Singh Yerur, J., 15.06.2026), MFA No. 5928 of 2022 (CPC), NC: 2026:KHC:28953: Appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) r/w Section 151 CPC against the order dated 28.06.2022 of the VIII Additional City Civil and Session Judge, CCH-15, Bengaluru, in O.S.No.4984/2020 rejecting I.A.Nos.1 and 2 filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC. On reference to the Karnataka Mediation Centre, the parties amicably resolved their dispute and a Memorandum of Settlement was filed under Section 89 of CPC read with Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005. Holding nothing further survived, the Court disposed of the appeal in terms of the Settlement Agreement, directed that the Memorandum of Settlement be made part of the decree, and held that pending interlocutory applications did not survive. It was noted on record that respondent Nos.6, 7 and 8 had filed a counterclaim, leaving the suit still pending before the trial Court.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:28953 MFA No. 5928 of 2022

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5928 OF 2022 (CPC)

BETWEEN:

SRI SIDDALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 92 YEARS S/O. LATE KEMPAGANGAIAH R/O. RAMESHWAR VILLAGE AND POST DODDABYLAVANGALA HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK - 561 204 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

SRI R. S. ASHWATHANARAYANA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O. SIDDALINGAPPA R/O. RAMESHWAR VILLAGE AND POST DODDABELAVANGALA HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK - 561 204 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

SRI R. G. MADHURAJ AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS S/O. GANGARAJ R/O. RAMESHWAR VILLAGE AND POST DODDABYLAVANGALA HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK - 561 204

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

(BY SRI SARAVANA S., ADVOCATE)

…APPELLANTS

AND:

SMT. PRAMEELA W/O. LATE GANGARAJU AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O. RAMESHWAR VILLAGE AND POST

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:28953 MFA No. 5928 of 2022

HC-KAR

DODDABYLAVANGALA HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK - 561 204 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

SMT. H. G. SANGEETHA W/O. SRI R. G. MADHURAJ AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/O RAMESHWAR VILLAGE AND POST DODDABYLAVANGALA HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK - 561 204 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

SMT. B. G. GEETHA W/O. ASHWATHANARAYANA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/O. RAMESHWAR VILLAGE AND POST DODDABYLAVANGALA HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK - 561 204 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

R. A. YASHWANTH AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS S/O. R. S. ASHWATHANARAYANA.

R. A. DHANUSHREE AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS D/O. R. S. ASHWATHANARAYANA.

RESPONDENTS NO.4 AND 5 ARE MINORS REP .BY THEIR GUARDIAN THEIR MOTHER SMT. B. G. GEETHA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS W/O. ASHWATHANARAYANA R/O. RAMESHWAR VILLAGE AND POST DODDABYLAVANGALA HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK - 561 204 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

SMT. S. GANGAMMA AGED ABOUTR 44 YEARS

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:28953 MFA No. 5928 of 2022

HC-KAR

W/O. T. MOHAN R/O. DOOR NO.185 LAKSHMINARASIMHA NILAYA VINAYAKA LAYOUT BINNAMANGALA NELAMANGALA TALUK - 562 123 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

ADESH ARYAN AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS S/O. GANGAMMA.

SURYA ARYAN AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS S/O. GANGAMMA MINOR REP. BY THEIR GUARDIAN THEIR MOTHER SMT. S. GANGAMMA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS W/O. T. MOHAN R/O. DOOR NO.185 LAKSHMINARASIMHA NILAYA VINAYAKA LAYOUT, BINNAMANGALA NELAMANGALA TALUK - 562 123 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

SMT. S. SHANTHAMMA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS W/O. SRINIVAS R/A. NAGARURU DASANAPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TLAUK BENGALURU - 562 162.

SMT. YOGITHA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS W/O. MADHUSUDHAN M. V. NO.63, MADHU NILAYA 2^ND MAIN ROAD HANUMAKKA LAYOUT

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:28953 MFA No. 5928 of 2022

HC-KAR

NEAR VIDYANIKETHAN SCHOOL ULLAL ROAD BANGALORE - 560 056.

SMT. KRUTHIKA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS W/O. BYRESH KODIPALYA KENGERI BENGALURU - 560 060.

SRI SHIVAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 53 YEAFS S/O. SIDDALINGAPPA R/O. NO.54/193/4 HARSHA INSTITUTIONS (CAMPUS) BYRAVESHWARANAGAR SONDEKOPPA BY PASS NELAMANGALA TALUK - 562 123 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

SMT. GIRIJA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS W/O. SHIVAKUMAR R/O. NO.54/193/4 HARSHA INSTITUTIONS (CAMPUS) BYRAVESHWARANAGAR SONDEKOPPA BY PASS NELAMANGALA TALUK - 562 123 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

SRI. S. HARSHA AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS SHIVAKUMAR R/O. NO.54/193/4 HARSHA INSTITUTIONS (CAMPUS) BYRAVESHWARANAGAR SONDEKOPPA BY PASS NELAMANGALA TALUK - 562 123 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:28953 MFA No. 5928 of 2022

HC-KAR

SRI YASHAS S. AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS S/O. SHIVAKUMAR R/O. NO.54/193/4 HARSHA INSTITUTIONS (CAMPUS) BYRAVESHWARANAGAR SONDEKOPPA BY PASS NELAMANGALA TALUK - 562 123 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI T. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R12 AND ALSO FOR R13, R14 AND R15)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/O 43 RULE 1(R) R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.06.2022 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 AND 2 IN OS.NO.4984/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE, CCH-15 BENGALURU, REJECTING THE I.A.NO.1 AND 2 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

ORAL JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for appellants and learned counsel

for respondents are present.

On the last occasion, the matter was referred to

the Karnataka Mediation Centre, Bengaluru, for resolution of the dispute between the parties.

6 -

NC: 2026:KHC:28953 MFA No. 5928 of 2022

HC-KAR

Pursuant to the said reference, the parties appeared before the Karnataka Mediation Centre, Bengaluru and with the intervention of the learned Mediator, have amicably resolved their dispute. The Settlement Agreement has accordingly been arrived at and Memorandum of Settlement is filed under Section 89 of CPC read with Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005 before this Court.

Learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel for respondent Nos.6 to 15 submit that notwithstanding the compromise entered into between the parties and its disposal, respondent Nos.6, 7 and 8 have filed a counterclaim and consequently, the suit is still pending adjudication before the trial Court.

The said submission is taken on record.

In view of the Settlement Agreement arrived at

between the parties before the Karnataka Mediation Centre, Bengaluru, nothing further survives for

7 -

NC: 2026:KHC:28953 MFA No. 5928 of 2022

HC-KAR

consideration in this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of in terms of the Settlement

Agreement.

The Memorandum of Settlement shall be made as part of the decree.

In view of disposal of the appeal, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and the same pales into insignificance.

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

CPN

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23