Sri Praveen Kumar Sutrave Vs Sri Jayasheel Reddy G — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sri Praveen Kumar Sutrave Vs Sri Jayasheel Reddy G — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 19.12.2025 set aside; appeal disposed of in terms of the joint compromise petition, which is treated as part and parcel of the decree; Registry directed to draw the decree strictly in accordance with the terms of the compromise.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 19.12.2025 dismissing the appellant-obstructor's application (IA No. 2) under Order XXI Rules 97 to 103 r/w Section 151 CPC in execution proceeding Ex.P.No.25171/2025 should be set aside in this Regular First Appeal under Section 96 CPC.

Court's answer

The Court, being satisfied that the compromise arrived at between the appellant/obstructor and respondent No.1/decree holder is lawful and voluntary, took the joint compromise petition on record.

Ratio / Principle

The compromise petition shall be treated as part and parcel of the decree; consequently, the impugned order dated 19.12.2025 is set aside and the appeal stands disposed of in terms of the joint compromise petition.

Key takeaways

The Registry is directed to draw the decree strictly in accordance with the terms of the compromise.ratio¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular First Appeal under Section 96 CPC by the obstructor against the order dated 19.12.2025 of the LVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayohall, Bengaluru, dismissing IA No. 2 filed under Order XXI Rules 97 to 103 r/w Section 151 CPC in execution proceeding Ex.P.No.25171/2025. Before disposal, the appellant/obstructor and respondent No.1/decree holder filed a joint compromise petition, personally affirming that the compromise was voluntary and free of coercion. Holding the compromise lawful and voluntary, the Court took it on record, treated it as part and parcel of the decree, set aside the impugned order, and disposed of the appeal in terms of the compromise, directing the Registry to draw the decree strictly in accordance with its terms. Judgment dated 09.01.2026; single-judge Bench (Sachin Shankar Magadum, J.).

NC: 2026:KHC:1256 RFA No. 2951 of 2025

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2951 OF 2025 (POS-)

BETWEEN:

SRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR SUTRAVE S/O SRI. AMARNATH SUTRAVE, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT FLAT NO. 402, NIRVANA-2 APTS, 4TH FLOOR, APARTMENTS, NO. 14, 1ST CROSS, VINAYAKA NAGARA, ANNAYAPPA LAYOUT, VIMANAPURA POST, KONENAAGRAHARA, BENGALURU - 560 017 …APPELLANT

(BY SRI. BHUVANENDRA RAJU P, ADVOCATE AND SRI. P.B. RAJU, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

AND:

SRI. JAYASHEEL REDDY G S/O K. GOPAL AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 121, 7TH AVENUE, RAINBOW RESIDENCY, JUNNASANDRA VILLAGE, SARJAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 035.

SRI. G. NARAYANA SWAMY S/O GOVINDA REDDY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:1256 RFA No. 2951 of 2025

HC-KAR

RESIDING AT NO. 88, MYLASANDRA VILLAGE, BEGUR POST, BENGALURU - 560 068.

SRI. K. VENKATESH (FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN) AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 402, 4TH FLOOR, NEW BBMP MUNICIPAL NO. 14/13 'NORVANA II RESIDENCY', KONENA AGRAHARA VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI BENGALURU EAST TALUK.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. JANARDHANA G, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;

VIDE ORDER DATED 26.12.2025, NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 IS DISPENSED WITH)

THIS RFA IS FILED U/S. 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.12.2025 PASSED IN EX. NO. 25171/2025, ON THE FILE OF THE C/C. LVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYOHALL, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE IA NO. 2 FILED U/O XXI RULE 97 TO 103 R/W SEC. 151 OF CPC. INTIME CF SUFFICIENT.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1256 RFA No. 2951 of 2025

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

The captioned appeal arises out of an order passed on an application filed under Order XXI Rule 97 of the CPC in Ex.P.No.25171/2025.

Today, a joint compromise petition is filed by the appellant/obstructor and respondent No.1/decree holder. Both the appellant and respondent No.1 are personally present before this Court. Upon due query, both parties state that they have carefully read and understood the terms and conditions of the compromise petition. They further affirm that the compromise has been entered into voluntarily, without any coercion, undue influence, or pressure from any quarter, and that they have agreed to amicably resolve the dispute and give a quietus to the litigation.

Being satisfied that the compromise arrived at between the parties is lawful and voluntary, the joint compromise petition is taken on record. The compromise

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1256 RFA No. 2951 of 2025

HC-KAR

petition shall be treated as part and parcel of the decree. Consequently, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal stands disposed of in terms of the joint compromise petition.

The Registry is directed to draw the decree strictly in accordance with the terms of the compromise.

Sd/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

HDK

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17