✦ High Court of India · 12 Mar 2025

V. Naga Laxmi W/o. Late v. Pandarinath aged

Case Details High Court of India · 12 Mar 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
12 Mar 2025
Length
1,650 words

Acts & Sections

1. V.Kalavathi, W/o. Late Sri Vasagoni Ramakrishna alias Ramakishtaiah or Ramakrishnaiah, aged 75 years, Occ Housewife, Fl/o'H'No 6-7' Yapral Village, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

2. V.Pandarinath,( died ) per LRs Appellants 4 to 7 S/o. Late Sri Vasagoni Ramakrishna alias Ramakishtaiah or Ramakrishnaiah, - aged 58 years, Occ Agriculture-cum Private Service, Rl/o.H.No.6-7, Yapral Village. ,Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

3. V.Surendernath, S/o. Late Sri Vasagoni Ramakrishna alias Ramakishtaiah or Ramakrishnaiah, aged 46 years, Occ Agriculture- cum Service in Toddy Shop, R/o.H.No.6-7, Yapral Village, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga ReddY District.

4. V. Naga Laxmi W/o. Late V. Pandarinath , aged 48 years Occ: Housewife

5. V. Ramya Priya Dio. Late V. Pandarinath aged above 29 years, Occ: Student

6. V. Sravani D/o. Late V. Pandarinath aged about 27 yearc Occ: Pvt' Employee

7. V. Rama Krishna S/o. Late V. Pandaarinath , aged about 25 years Occ: Student All are Rl/o. H.No. 6-7, Yapral ( V) Malkajgiri (M) Ranga Reddy District' ( Aooellants 4lo 7 arc brouqht on record as LRS of deceased 2nd appellant as beibourtOrderdated 13-6-2018 made in l.A. No. 3 of 2018 ) B. Smt. Janaki Srinivasan, W/o. Late T.R' Srinivasan, aged ab-out ^88 - V"iis,-nyo. ZaOOg, Lames Town Port Saratoga, Califomia, 9570 USA' reo. bv its GPA holder P. Kumar, S/o. Late P Mallesh' aged 43 years' Rio g'-t+, F4, Ramnagar, Hyderabad -20' ( C.T. amende d in l.A. No Order dated lr)-6-2019.) 6 of 2019 in A.S. No. 1094 of 2016 vide Court ..APPELLANTS AND

4. 5 t) V.Venkatswarly, S/o. Late V.Mallesha Aged about 52 yeats' rJcc Business Sri V.Jaganath (Died per LRs Plaintiff Nos. 3 to 6), - Smt.V.Sarala W/o. Late V.Jaganatham Goud, Aged about 4i years' Housewife, Rtr. 5-101, Yapral, Ranga Reddy District V.Manasa, Dio. Late V.Jaganatham Goud,, W/o Sril<anth' Atled.about 21 i;;;;, ct; i,rrse*it", Rv"o. s-tot, Yapral, Ranga Reddv District' V.Privanka,tVo.LateV.JaganathamGoud,Agedab'out17'yr:ars'Student R/o. S-tOt, Yapral., Ranga Reddy District. V.Akshava,,l)/o.LateV.JaganathamGoud,Agedaboutl2yearsStudent' Fl/o. S-16t, Yapral, Ranga Reddy District PlaintiffNos,:,and6beingtheMinorsrepresentedllytheirl\lotherand itr"triri crr't:irn Smt.v.Sirala w/o.. Latb V.Jaganatham Gcud, Aged about 41 years, Ho,rsewife 7 Janakisriniv.asanW/o.LateT.R.Srinivasan,(R-TirnplearJer'lvideC.o. iiilro'sOrib_ joia in t.n.ruo. 4 ot 2O1B ) ( Respondelt No. T lransposed as Ai'pir"t No.truiOu C.O. dated 10-06-2019 in l A No 6 of 2C18) ..,RESPONDENTS AppealUnderSectiong6ReadwithorderXLlRulesll)&(2)ofCodeofCivil Procedure aggrie'red ov ttre-Juag;eryi1-q-9e-c9.9.aated roloi;z016 in o'S'No' b2r-;irbb8-o-n the fitd of ttre tion'bte XtV Additional Distri,:t and Sessions Judge, Ranga ReddY District. IAN O: 7 OF 2018 Between: l.Smt.JanakiS;rinivasan,W/o.LateT'R.Srinivasan,..aged.aboutSS,years'f,Uo ieO-69- iim,:s fown iort Saratog-a, California, 9tt70 UISA rep' by its GPA "Mallesh, aged 43 years, Fi/o B-14' F4' h;ld;;' P. Ki*ar, S/o. Late P. Ramnagar, []Yderabad -20. .. Petitionel Respondent NO. 7 in Appeal / Proposed A ppellant No 8 in Appeal

2.V.Venkatswany,S/o.LateV.MalleshaAgedabout52yearsOccBusiness 3. Sri V.Jaganalh (Died) per LRs R10 to Rl 3

4. Smt.V.Sarala, W/o. Late V.Jaganatham Goud, Aged about 47 years, Housewife, Ryo. 5-101 , Yapral, Ranga Reddy District

5. V.Manasa, D/o. Late V.Jaganatham Goud,, Wo. Srikanth, Aged about 21 years, Occ Housewife, R/ o. 5-101, Yapral, Ranga Reddy District.

6. V.Priyanka, D/o. Late V.Jaganatham Goud, Aged about 18 years, Student Rl/o. 5-101, Yapral., Ranga Reddy District.

7. V.Akshaya,, D/o. Late V.Jaganatham Goud, Aged aboul 12 years. Student, Rl/o. 5-101, Yapral, Ranga Reddy District. (Petitioner No. 7 being minor represented by their lVlother and Natural Guardian Smt.V.Sarala , 4tn Petitoner herein)

8. Dr. P. Sreen Raj S/o. P. Krishna, aged 44 years, Occ: Doctor/ Business, Rl/o 35-26, Brindhavan Colony, Sainikpuri, Malkajgiri- 094 ( C.T. impleaded in l.A.No. 7 of 2018 as petitioner No. 8 in A.S.No. 1094 of 2016 vide C.O. Dated 11-07-2019) .. Appellants And

1. V.Kalavathi, W/o. V. Ramakrishna aged 78 years, Rl/o.H.No.5-7, Yapral Village, IMalkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 2. V.Pandarinath,( died ) per LRs Appellants 4 to 7 3- V. Surender, S/o. Late V. Ramakrishna, aged about 56 years, Rl/o.H.No.6-7, Yapral Village. ,Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District,

4. V. Naga Laxmi W/o. Late V. Pandarinath , aged 48 years 5. V. Ramya Priya D/o. Late V. Pandarinath aged above 29 years, 6. V. Sravani D/o. Late V. Pandarinath aged about 27 yearc 7. V. Rama Krishna Sio. Late V. Pandaarinath , aged about 25 years All are R:/o. H.No. 6-7, Yapral ( V) Malkajgiri (M) Ranga Reddy District. . Respondents. /. Defendants/ Appellants No. 1 to 7 in Appeal l.A. No. 7 ot 2018: Application Under Order 23 Rule 3 R/w. Sec. 151 of CPC pr Petition under Section Rule of CPC praying that the High Court may be pleased to pass a decree in terms of the Memorandum of Compromise filed therewith as between the appellants and respondents in the said l.A. No 7 of 2018 on the file of the High Court. /. TheaplrcaIandlnterlocutoryApplicationcorringthls<layforordersas to settlement in the lrresence of sRt. v. HARI HARAN, A,lvocate 'or the appellant andofSriANooPI(UMARVEDATI,AdvocateforRespc,ndentN:.landofSri VIJAY B. PAROPAT(ARI , Advocate for Respondent Ncs 3 :o 6 and SRI E' VENKATAIAH, Advocate for Respondent No. 7 and SIll t\4 SLIRENDER RAO' SENIoR CoUNSEL for Respondent No. 8, Appellant and rerspondent through their respective Advc,t:ates having filed in l.A. No. 7 of 2O1i) court to pass a der;ree in terms the memorandum of r:omprom se entered into requesting the between them and upon perusing the grounds appeat, judgmenl arrd decree of the lower court and the rnemo of compromise purporting to have tree n signed by the parties and their Advocates and filed with the said l.A. No. i' of 2018 and it appearing from the said memorandum of compromise that the parties; herein trave entered into compromise and settled the matter out of court in terms rnemorandum of compromise filed herein. This Ccurt DOTH RECORD the terms of tre sald rnemorandum of compromise in original where of is filed in the said l.A. Nc' I of 2018 and a copy whereof is; annexed hereto and DOTH in terms of the szrid memorandum of compromtse declare ORDER and DECREE as follows: 1 . That the ap,peal be and hereby is disposed of aLnd I h l"lo. 7 of 20 18 is allowecl in terms of the memorandum of understzrnding arived at between the pa.ties on 26-11-2018.The entire terms and conditic ns agreed upon between the parties as per the memorandum of understarrding, terms and conditions as follows:

1. That the First Party hereinafter accepts that the Second Party is the absolute owner and possessor of the entire schedule of the property. And the First Party hereinafter releases, convey all the rights/interests, title whatsoever over the entire Schedule of the property in favour of the Second Party

2. That the First Party conveys with the Second Party that the Second Party can file this Ir/OU in any court of law and get the this MOU recorded in any court of law or enter in any court compromise/settlement over the Schedule of the property and if needed the Second party can get this MOU registered at sub-register office and the First party shall cooperate in exgcuting and getting this deed registered if so required by the Second party and this MOU is binding even on the vendors of the Agreement of sale dated 211071'1995 as the entire rights/interested are devolved on to the First party after the orders and Decree of the Hon'ble High Court dated '19-02-2018 and Hon'ble Apex Courts dated 10-08-2018 and also the entire sale consideration is paid to the Vendors of the Agreement of sale dated

2110711995.over the Schedule of the property through challan No. '16715 dated 23-02-2018.

3. That the First Party conveys with the Second Party that the First Party having accepted and admitted the ownershipffitle of the Second party and entered into this MOU/deed over entire Schedule of the property, thd First party conveys that accordingly the orders and Decree passed in favour of the First party by the Honourable High Court in A.S. No. 498 /2005 & A.S.No. 521 I2OOS dated 19-02-2018 for entire land admeasuring Ac 04-'1 .82 Guntas as per Ex-A-17 in O.S.No.319 i1996 stands assigned, transferred in favour of the Second party and the second party is at liberty -7 SCHEDULE OF THE PROPERTV ( As per plon onnexed) All the land in Sy No. 150 (part) and 151 respectively admea.suring Acres 2-29 Guntas and Acres 1-31 Guntas total admeasuring A: O4-21_O Guntas out of which only total lard admeasuring Ac O4-1.82 Guntas as per Ex-A.-17 in O.S.no. 3'1 I /1996 is ,nclu Jed ( as per the Plan annexed herein situate at /apral Village, Alwal Mandar ersturhile Malkajgiri Mandal, Malkajgiri -Medchal District erstwhile Ranga Reddy Disrrict bounded by: NORTH: Part of Sy.No.1S0 (HUDA approved tayout in SRI KRISH ENCLAVE) SOUTH: Pari of Sy.No. 1SO & 152 ( HUDA approved tal,out in ROCk GARDEN) EAST: Sy No. 133& 134 ( HUDA approved layout in S S. ENCLAVE) WEST: Sy. lrlo. 164 ( HUDA approved tayout in SHATLI CiAtiDEN)

19. That the petitioner; have to pay an amount of Rs. '1 5,00,000/. w,th an interest on the said amcunt at 7o/o to the respondent No.1 from the date of memorandum of rrnderstanding i.e.26-11-201g. The s;rid anrornt should be paid within an outer limit of thirty (30 ) days from the date of receilrt of a copy of this judgment.

20. That there shall be rro order as to costs in this appeal \ Sd/- K. SRll'llVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR 1I) SECTI()N OFFICER To 1. The XIV Additioni:r District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Redriy Diskict at 2. Two C.D.Copies L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad HIGH COURT DATED:1 210312025 DECREE FOR CC)N{PF.()N4ISE r.A. NO. 7 0F 2018 IN/A NI) AS.No.1094 ol'2016 ^.YO) ,4J l 1EL4nar, s $as ALLOWING THII l.A. I\(). 7 OF 2018 AND DISPOSING OF TFIE AI']'EAL IN TERMS OF COMPROMISE e\

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments