SMT. ANNAPOORNAMMA G. S v. SRI M. NARAYANAN

Judgment

1. SRI M. NARAYANAN S/O LATE C. MUNISWAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 341, 10TH CROSS, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR BANGALORE - 560 086

2. M. NAGARAJ S/O LATE C. MUNISWAMAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR

2(a) SMT. N. BHARATHI, D/O LATE M. NAGARAJ, W/O LAKSHMIPATHI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.120, 7TH PHASE, BANASHANKARI SARAKKI, J. P. NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 078.

3. SMT.ASHWATHAMMA W/O MUTHUKUMAR AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 10 & 11 20TH CROSS, TANK BUND ROAD, V BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 011 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. K. VASANTH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 V/OS DATED 28.04.2025 R2(a) & R3 ARE D/W) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.09.2016 PASSED IN OS.NO.7206/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE XXVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION, AND DISMISSING THE SUIT AGAINST DEFENDANT NO.5 THEREIN. IN RFA NO. 2026/2016 BETWEEN:

2. SMT ANNAPOORNAMMA G. S. W/O SRI K. R. PANDURANGA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, SRI K. R. PANDURANGA SETTY, S/O RAGHU SETTY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR BOTH ARE RESIDING AT THE PORTION OF THE PREMISES BEARING HOUSE LIST NO.251 OF KHANESHMARI NO.51/2, SARAKKI GATE, J.P NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 078 ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. DAYALU K. N., ADVOCATE) AND:

5. BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER BANGALORE - 560 001 ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER JAYANAGAR RANGE, JAYANAGAR 4TH BLOCK, BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BANGALORE - 560 011 SRI.M. NARAYANAN, S/O LATE C. MUNISWAMAPPA, AGED BOUT 71 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.341 10TH CROSS, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 086 M. NAGARAJ S/O LATE C. MUNISWAMAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HI LR SMT N. BHARATHI, D/O LATE M. NAGARAJ, W/O LAKSHMIPATHI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.120, 7TH PHASE, BANASHANKARI SARAKKI, J.P NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 078 SMT ASHWATHAMMA, W/O MUTHUKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NO.10 & 11, 20TH CROSS, TANK BED, JAYANAGAR, V BLOCK, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR BANGALORE - 560 011 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. K. VASANTH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R3 SRI. ARAVIND M. NEGLUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2 V/O DATE 28.04.2025 R4 & R5 ARE D/W) THIS RFA FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.09.2016 PASSED IN OS NO.4841/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE XXVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION. IN RFA NO. 2027/2016 BETWEEN:

2. SMT ANNAPOORNAMMA G. S. W/O SRI K. R. PANDURANGA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS SRI K. R. PANDURANGA SETTY S/O RAGHU SETTY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT THE PORTION OF THE PREMISES BEARING HOUSE LIST NO.251, OF KHANESHMARI NO.51/2, SARAKKI GATE, J.P NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 078 (BY SRI. DAYALU K. N., ADVOCATE) ...APPELLANTS AND:

1. SRI M. NARAYANAN S/O LATE C. MUNISWAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS R/AT NO.10& 11, C/O M. ASHWATHAMMA, 20TH CROSS, MARENAHALLI TANK BED, JAYANAGARA V BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 011 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR

2. M. NAGARAJ S/O LATE C. MUNISWAMAPPA, SINCE DECEASED BY THE LR 2(a). SMT N. BHARATHI, D/O LATE M. NAGARAJ, W/O LAKSHMIPATHI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO.120,7TH PHASE, BANASHANKARI SARAKKI, J. P. NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 078 SMT M. ASHWATHAMMA W/O K. V. MUTHUKUMAR AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT NO.10 & 11, 20TH CROSS, MARENAHALLI, TANK BED, JAYANAGARA, V BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 011

3. (BY SRI. K. K. VASANTH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1; V/O DATED 28.04.2025 R2(a) & R3 ARE D/W) ...RESPONDENTS THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.09.2016 PASSED IN OS NO.3681/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE XXVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION. THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:S CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL JUDGMENT RFA no.2001/2016 is filed by defendants no.3 and 4 challenging judgment and decree dated 17.09.2016 passed by - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR XXVII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in OS no.7206/2001. RFAs no.2026/2016 and 2027/2016 are filed by plaintiffs challenging judgment and decree dated 17.09.2016 passed by XXVII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in OS no. 3681/2001 and 4841/2001.

2. It was submitted, during pendency of appeal, by order dated 12.08.2025, matters were referred for mediation. Parties have participated in mediation, which has resulted in settlement and terms of which are drawn in agreement placed before Court and prayed that appeals may be disposed of in terms of settlement.

3. Terms of settlement reads as under: "MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT UNDER SECTION 89 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE READ WITH RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE KARNATAKA CIVIL PROCEDURE (MEDIATION) RULES, 2005 The aforesaid appeals were referred to mediation to enable the parties to explore possibilities for resolving the dispute between themamicably. The essence of the dispute the appellants/defendants being aggrieved by the Common Judgement dated 17.09.2016 passed in OS No.7206/2001, OS No.4841/2001 and OS No.3681/2001 by XXVII Addl City Civil Judge, at Bengaluru City (CCH-9). By the said order O.S No. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR 7206/2001 was decreed in part, declaring that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the A schedule property. - - - - - - Plaintiff is entitled for possession of the "B" Schedule property from Defendant No.3 and 4, directing them to handover vacant possession of schedule B property to the plaintiff within 4 Months from the date of judgement, falling which plaintiff is at liberty to take possession the suit schedule property under due process of law. Plaintiff is entitled for mesne profits in respect of B schedule property from defendant No.3 and 4 from date of suit till handing over the possession. There shall be separate enquiries with regard to mesne profits in respect of Schedule B property as per Order XX Rule 12 of CPC. The suit against defendant no.5 is dismissed in view of compromise entered in to between the plaintiff and defendant No.5. Suits in OS No.4841/2001 and 3681/2001 filed by the plaintiff therein are dismissed. The present appeals are preferred against the said order. The defendant Nos.3 and 4 in O.S. No.7206/2001 have filed R.F.A No.2001/2016. The plaintiffs No.1 and 2 in O.S.No.4841/2001 have filed R.F.A. No.2026/2016. The plaintiffs No.1 and 2 in O.S.No.3681/2001 R.F.A. No.2027/2016. In the course of mediation, the parties have resolved their dispute and have agreed to resolve the dispute between them amicably on the following terms and conditions:- I. Brief Facts Leading To The Present Appeal R. F. A.No.2001/2016 arising out of O.S. No.7206/2001 HC-KAR

2. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 The respondent No.1 herein is the plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/2001 and the appellant Nos.1 and 2 herein are the defendant Nos.3 and 4 in O.S. No.7206/2001 and the respondent No.2 herein is the defendant No.1, since deceased by his LR Smt.N.Bharathi is respondent No.2(a) and the respondent No.3 herein is defendant No.2 in O.S. Smt. No.7206/2001 M.P.Venkatalakshmamma is the defendant No.5 M.P.Venkatalakshmamma having compromised with the plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/2001, in respect of Schedule C Property by receiving amount, the said suit came to be dismissed against her. No.7206/2001. O.S. As herein The respondent No.1 herein being the plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/2001 had filed the said suit against the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 and respondent Nos.2&3 Smt.M.Ρ. Venkatalakshmamma, before XXVII Addl City Civil and Sessions Judge, at Bengaluru City (CCH-9), seeking to declare that he is the absolute owner of A Schedule property and to direct the Appellants Nos.1 and 2 herein, who are the defendant Nos. 3 and 4 therein to deliver vacant possession of B Schedule property to him and also to direct defendant No.5 therein viz., Smt.M.P. deliver possession of Schedule C property to him and on failure on their part to do so, the court may be pleased to order the delivery of B and C schedule property through the agency of the court and also to hold an enquiry with regard to the mesne profit. Venkatalakshmamma Schedule A Property The property bearing No.51/2, SarakkiGate, Kanakapura Road, Bengaluru 560076, and measuring East to West 70 Feet and North to - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR South 25 Feet, consisting of Asbestos Roofed 4 houses, 1 Well, 3 Coconut trees, bounded on the; East by: Road, West by: Property belonging to Gowramma and Dasappa, North by: Property belonging to Veeranna South by: Property belonging to Venkatesha Reddy. Schedule B Property All the piece and parcel of the schedule property bearing house list No.251, III notified area, Katha No.58/51/2 of Sarakki Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, measuring East to West 35 Feet and North to South 25 Feet and bounded on; East by: Property bearing house list No.251 (Remaining Portion) Measuring 25 Feet X 35 Feet West by: Property sold to Basappa of the same house list No.251 North by: Private property and South by: property belonging to Krishna Reddy. And there is a passage measuring East to West 60 feet and North to South 3 feet bounded on the; East by: Portion of same property bearing house list No.251 West by: Kanakapura Road North by: Private property and South by: Basappa's Property. And this passage exclusively belongs to the plaintiffs and that there is a water pipe in the passage.. Schedule C Property House property bearing Panchayath Khata No.262, House Kanakapura Road, SarakkiGate of Sarakki list No.251, situated - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR Gramapanchayath, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, bounded on: East by: Road, West by: Remaining property of the same No.251, North by: Bagegowda's House and South by: Venkatesh Reddy's house Measuring East to West 36 12 feet and North to South 25 Feet, including 2 Coconut trees. II Brief Facts Leading To R.F.A. No.2026/2016 arising out of O.S. No.4841/2001 LR's N.Bharathi The appellants herein being the plaintiffs in O.S. No.4841/2001 had filed the said suit against BBMP, Assistant Revenue Officer Jayanagar Range BBMP, M.Narayanan, M.Nagaraj, Since Deceased M.Ashwathamma, before XXVII Addi City Civil and Sessions Judge, at Bengaluru City (CCH-9) for permanent injunction to restrain the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 therein from changing Katha of the schedule property in the name of defendant Nos.3 to 5 and for mandatory injunction directing the defendant Nos.1 and 2 to change Katha in their names, in respect of suit schedule property Schedule Property All the piece and parcel of the schedule property bearing house list No.251, III notified area, Katha No.58/51/2 of Sarakki Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, measuring East to West 35 Feet and North to South 25 Feet and bounded on; East by: Property bearing house list No.251 (Remaining Portion) Measuring 25 Feet X 35 Feet West by Property sold to Basappa of the same house list No.251 North by: Private property and - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR South by: property belonging to Krishna Reddy. And there is a passage measuring East to West 60 feet and North to South 3 feet bounded on the; East by: portion of same property bearing house list No.251 West by: Kanakapura Road North by: Private property and South by: Basappa's Property. And this passage exclusively belongs to the plaintiffs and that there is a water pipe in the passage. (Note: The schedule property is Schedule B property in O.S.No.7206/2001) III Brief Facts Leading To R.F.A. No.2027/2016 arising out of O.S. No.3681/2001 The appellants herein being the plaintiffs in O.S. No.3681/2001 had filed the said suit against Sri.,M.Narayanan and M.Nagaraj, Since Deceased by his LR's Smt. N.Bharathi and Ashwathamma, before XXVII Addi City Civil and Sessions Judge, at Bengaluru City (CCH-9) for declaration to declare that, the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No.6759/1992 on the file of VIII Addl City Civil Judge, Bengaluru dated 05.11.1993 is not binding on them and the same is null and void and for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering with their possession of schedule property claiming to have purchase the same, under registered Sale Deed dated 29.11.1995, bearing registration No.9815/1995- 96, Book-I, Vol. 1423, at pages 142 - 150, in the office of Senior Sub-registrar, Kengeri. Schedule Property - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR All the piece and parcel of the schedule property bearing house list No.251, III notified area, Katha No.58/51/2 of Sarakki Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, measuring East to West 35 Feet and North to South 25 Feet and bounded on; East by: Property bearing house list No.251 (Remaining Portion) Measuring 25 Feet X 35 Feet West by: Property sold to Basappa of the same house list No.251 North by: Private property and South by: property belonging to Krishna Reddy. And there is a passage measuring East to West 60 feet and North to South 3 feet bounded on the; East by: portion of same property bearing house list No.251 West by: Kanakapura Road North by: Private property and South by:Basappa's Property.. And this passage exclusively belongs to the plaintiffs and that there is water pipe in the passage.

3. The trial court having considered the materials placed on record has passed common judgment and decree in O.S. No.7206/2001 dated 17.09.2016 in following terms: (cid:1) The suit of the plaintiff in O.S.No.7206/01 is hereby decreed in part. (cid:1) It is declared that plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/01 is the absolute owner of Schedule 'A' property. (cid:1) Further the plaintiff in O.S.No.7206/01 is entitled for possession of Schedule 'B' property from defendants 3 and 4. (cid:1) Defendants 3 and 4 in O.S.7206/01 are hereby to handover vacant possession of directed - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR four months Schedule 'B' property to the plaintiff Narayanan within from the date of this Judgment. Failing which plaintiff Narayanan is at liberty to take the possession of the suit schedule property under due process of law. (cid:1) Plaintiff in O.S.No. 7206/01 is also entitled for mesne profit. in respect of Schedule 'B' property from defendants 3 and 4 from the date of suit till handing over possession of the Schedule 'B' property. (cid:1) There shall be separate enquiries with regard to mesne profit in respect of Schedule 'B' property as per provisions of Order 20 Rule 12 C.P.C. (cid:1) The against O.S.No.7206/01 is hereby dismissed in view of compromise entered into between plaintiff Narayanan and defendant no.5. defendant no.5 (cid:1) The suits in O.S.No.4841/01 and 3681/01 filed by plaintiffs are hereby dismissed. (cid:1) Under the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no order as to costs in all the suits. (cid:1) Draw decree accordingly. (cid:1) Keep original Judgment in O.S.7206/01 and copies thereof in O.S.No.4841/01 and 3681/01. the appellants No.1 and 2

4. The appellants No.1 and 2 in R.F.A No.2001/2016, the appellants No.1 and 2 in R.F.A. No.2026/2016, in R.F.A. No.2027/2016 and the respondent No.1 in R.F.A No.2001/2016, in R.F.A. No.2026/2016 and the respondent No.1 in R.F.A. No.2027/2016 have amicably settled the dispute between them in the following terms: the respondent No.3 a) appellants No.1 The in R.F.A No.2001/2016, being the defendants no.3 and 4 2 HC-KAR b) - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 in O.S. No.7206/2001 have admitted that, the respondent No.1 in R.F.A No.2001/2016 being the plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/2001 is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule A property and theyare entitled to have possession of the B schedule property, as per the common judgment and decree 17.09.2016. 2 appellants No.1 The In R.F.A No.2001/2016, being the defendants no.3 and 4 in O.S. No.7206/2001 have agreed to receive from the respondent No.1 in R.F.A No.2001/2016 being the plaintiff In O.S. No.7206/2001,a sum of Rs.27,00,000/- by way of compensation, which includes the refund of the sale consideration said to have been paid by them to Sri Muniswamappa and Sri M.Nagaraj under the alleged Sale Deed dated 29.11.1995. c) The defendants no.3 and 4 in O.S. No.7206/2001 and the respondent No.1 in R.F.A No.2001/2016 being the plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/2001, have agreed to pay a Rs.27,00,000/- as follows: • A sum of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Only) by way of demand draft bearing No. 391374, dated 12.09.2025 drawn on State Bank of India, Mahalakshmi Layout Branch, in favour of the Annapurna. G.S, as per her instruction and details of Aadhaar and Bank A/c, Annapoornamma.G.S. In the sale deed and also cause title in R.F.A.No.2001/2016, the appellant No.1 In RFA No.2001/2016, being the defendant No.3 in O.S.No. 7206/2001 and • A sum of Rs.12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Only) by way of demand draft No.391373, dated 12.09.2025 drawn on State Bank of India, Mahalakshmi Layout Branch, In favour of K.R. Panduranga Shetty as per her instruction and details of Aadhaar and Bank - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR A/c, who is also known as K.R.Panduranga Setty in the sale deed and also cause title in R.F.A.No.2001/2016, the appellant No.2 in RFA O.S.No.7206/2001. O.S.No.7206/2001. No.2001/2016, defendant No.4 In full and final settlement of all the claims of Appellant No.1 and 2 in RFA No.2001/2016 being the Defendant No.3 and 4 In O.S.No.7206/2001 over Schedule B Property. in R.F.A No.2001/2016, being d) It is further undertaken by the appellants No.1 and 2 defendants no.3 and 4 in O.S. No.7206/2001 that the Sale Deed dated 29.11.1995, registered as document No.9815/1995-96, Book-I, Vol 1423, at pages, at pages 142150, dated 24.08.1996, in the office of Senior Sub-registrar, Kengeri, Bengaluru shall stand cancelled and the same shall be informed to the Senior Sub-registrar, Kengeri, Bengaluru to carry out the necessary formalities of cancellation and they do not have any objection for the Respondent No.1 in RFA No.2001/2016 O.S.No.7206/2001 to take the return of the original Sale deed dated 29.11.1995 which Is In O.S.No.7206/2001, marked as Ex.D10 O.S.No.4841/2001 and O.S.No.3681/2001. Plaintiff e) 2 appellants No.1 in R.F.A The No.2001/2016, being the defendants no.3 and 4 in O.S. No.7206/2001 further state that they have no claim whatsoever over the schedule B Property on the receipt of the demand Drafts for Rs.27,00,000/-, including mesne profits. f) The said Demand Drafts Shall be handed over to the Appellants 1 and 2 in RFA No.2001/2016 before the Hon'ble Court. HC-KAR g) h) i) j) k) - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 2 appellants No.1 in R.F.A The No.2001/2016, being the defendants no.3 and 4 in O.S. No.7206/2001 have agreed and undertaken to handover vacant possession of the B schedule property, free from all encumbrances to the respondent No.1 in R.F.A No.2001/2016 being plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/2001 within 3 months from the date of the order of this Hon'ble Court recording this compromise and 2 appellants No.1 in R.F.A The No.2001/2016, being the defendants no.3 and 4 in O.S. No.7206/2001 further declare that, they have not encumbered the Schedule B property in any manner whatsoever pursuant to the sale deed dated 29.11.1995; and 2 appellants No.1 in R.F.A The No.2001/2016, being the defendants no.3 and 4 in O.S. No.7206/2001 on their failure to handover the vacant possession of the schedule B property, the respondent No.1 in R.F.A No.2001/2016 being the plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/2001, is entitled to take possession through due process of law. The property tax for the years 1996 till date will be borne by the, the respondent No.1 in R.F.A No.2001/2016 being the plaintiff in O.S. No. 7206/2001. The Khata, power and water connection in respect of the B Schedule property will be transferred to the name of the respondent No.1 in R.F.A No.2001/2016 being in O.S. No.7206/2001, and the appellants No.1 and 2 In R.F.A No.2001/2016, being the defendants no.3 and 4 In O.S. No.7206/2001 have not objection for the same and they will assist the respondent No.1 In R.F.A No.2001/2016 being the plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/2001 in the same. the plaintiff HC-KAR a) b) b) - 17 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 Wherefore, the appellants in R.F.A No.2001/2016 pray that; The appeal may be dismissed, confirming the judgment and decree dated 17.09.2016, passed in O.S. No.7206/2001 by the XXVII Addl City Civil Judge, at Bengaluru City (CCH 9), declaring the respondent No.1 in R.F.A No.2001/2016, who is the plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/2001 as the absolute owner of Schedule A Property. And he is entitled for possession of Schedule B Property. Cancellation of sale deed dated 29.11.1995, registered as document No.9815/1995-96, Book- I, Vol 1423, at pages, at pages 142150, dated 24.08.1996, in the office of Senior Sub-registrar, Kengeri, Bengaluru, compensation of Rs. 27,00,000/- Including the refund of sale consideration pald thereof, in respect of Schedule B Property, granting 3 months' time for them to hand over vacant possession of respondent No.1 in R.F.A No.2001/2016 who is the plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/2001. the B schedule property received having Cancellation of sale deed dated 29.11.1995, registered as document No.9815/1995-96, Book- I, Vol 1423, at pages, at pages 142150, dated 24.08.1996, in the office of Senior Sub-registrar, Kengeri, Bengaluru, compensation of Rs. 27,00,000/- Including the refund of sale consideration pald thereof, in respect of Schedule B Property, granting 3 months' time for them to hand over vacant possession of respondent No.1 in R.F.A No.2001/2016 who is the plaintiff in O.S. No.7206/2001. the B schedule property received having c) Send the decree of cancellation of the sale deed dated 29.11.1995, the concerned Sub- Registrar, under Section 31(2) of Specific Relief Act, 1963 so that he may note on the copy of the - 18 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR instrument contained in his books the fact of its cancellation. d) Dismiss R.F.A. No.2026/2016 in view of and R.F.A. the above said No.2027/2016 settlement, confirming the judgment and decree dated 17.09.2016, passed in O.S. No.4841/2001 and O.S. No.3681/2001 by XXVII Addl City Civil Judge, at Bengaluru City (CCH-9). e) Granting three months times to Appellants No.1 & 2 in RFA No.2001/2016 being the Defendants No.3 and 4 in O.S.No. 7206/2001, to vacate and handover the vacant possession of the suit schedule B property to Respondent No.1 In RFA in O.S. from all encumbrances. No.7206/2001 in RFA Failing which the Respondent No.1 No.2001/2016 being the Plaintiff in O.S.No. 7206/2001 shall be at liberty to take possession of Schedule B Property, through due process of law. plaintiff f) Directing the parties to bear their own cost. IV. In view of the aforesaid agreement entered into between the parties, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be please to pass appropriate orders recording the terms of the agreement entered into by the parties, in the interest of Justice."

4. Parties are present and identified by respective counsel. On interaction, they stated, terms of settlement have been explained them and after understanding, they have affirmed same out of their free will and volition without there being any threat, coercion and/or undue influence from anyone. Since BBMP was arrayed as - 19 - NC: 2025:KHC:38029 RFA No. 2001 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 2026 of 2016 RFA No. 2027 of 2016 HC-KAR proforma party in connected suits, which was dismissed and same is confirmed, its presence is not required for settlement.

5. In terms of settlement, two demand drafts bearing no.391374 & 391373 dated 12.09.2025 drawn in favour of Smt.Annapoorna and Sri KR Panduranga Shetty for Rs.15 Lakhs and Rs.12 Lakhs respectively. As per para 4 (c) and (e), said demand drafts are handed over to Smt.Annapoorna and Sri KR Panduranga Shetty and they have acknowledged receipt of same.

6. I have perused terms of settlement and same are found to be lawful. Memorandum of settlement is taken on record and accepted.

7. *Appeals are disposed of in terms of settlement. Registry to draw decree incorporating terms of settlement. Respondents are at liberty to seek for return of Ex.D10 as per terms of settlement. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49 *Corrected vide court order dated 06.11.2025.