Dismissed¶36

Sri M v. Shivakumar v Smt Veena

Karnataka HC8 Jul 2026RFA/1745/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of first appeal on memo recording out-of-court settlement between parties; appeal dismissed as settled out of Court; refund of 75% of court fee under Section 66, Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act; underlying suit for specific performance (OS No.94/2017, I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mandya) dismissed by decree dated 10.09.2020; RFA No.1745/2020, High Court of Karnataka (neutral citation NC: 2026:KHC:34487).

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as settled out of Court; appellant entitled to refund of admissible court fee under Section 66 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act; Registry directed to refund 75% of the court fee paid to the appellant. ¶36

Sri M v Shivakumar Vs Smt Veena — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:34487 RFA No. 1745 of 2020

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1745 OF 2020 (SP)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. M.V. SHIVAKUMAR, S/O VENKATESHA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT 1^ST CROSS, BEHIND KALIKAMBA TEMPLE NALABANDAVADI MANDYA CITY – 571 401

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. K.L. SREENIVAS, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SMT VEENA, W/O LATE RAMESHA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,

¶14

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

SRI SAGAR S/O LATE RAMESHA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

¶16

BOTH ARE R/AT CHINDAGIRIDODDI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT-571401

¶17

AMENDMENT CARRIED OUT IN COMPLIANCE OF THE HON’BLE COURT ORDER ON 08.07.2022

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(R1- SD, R2- SD)

¶20

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:34487 RFA No. 1745 of 2020

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC., 1908 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.09.2020 PASSED IN OS NO.94/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM., MANDYA DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

Learned counsel for appellant files a memo

¶27

seeking permission to withdraw the appeal. In the memo it

¶28

is stated that the matter is settled between the parties

¶29

outside the Court. The memo reads thus:

¶30

“The appellant most humbly submits as follows:

¶31

The appellant and the respondents have settled the dispute between them with respect to the subject matter of this appeal outside the Court, and as such, the appellant respectfully prays this Hon’ble Court be kindly pleased to permit him to withdraw the appeal, and order to refund the court fee paid in this appeal; as provided under Section 66 of the Karnataka Court Fees & Suits

¶32