The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14981-DB RFA No. 2074 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2074 OF 2024 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT C R RAJANI W/O. LATE RAJAGOPAL IYENGAR AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 2. VENUGOPAL S/O. LATE RAJAGOPAL IYENGAR AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO. 427 C/O. SRI. RAMAKRISHNA IYENGAR 4TH MAIN, 15TH CROSS, SRINAGAR BENGALURU-560 050. (BY SRI. VIVEK SUBBA REDDY – SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. B M MOHAN KUMAR - ADVOCATE) …APPELLANTS AND: 1. SRI K R VASAN S/O. LATE RAMASWAMY IYENGAR AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 2. SMT. JAYASHREE W/O. LATE RAGU BALAN AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
Legal Reasoning
3. SMT. SUJATHA W/O. JAYARAM AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14981-DB RFA No. 2074 of 2024 ALL THE RESIDING AT NO. 365 KUDLU VILLAGE, MADIWALA POST BENGALURU-560068. (BY SRI. RAGHU R – ADVOCATE) …RESPONDENTS THIS RFA FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 3.7.2024 PASSED IN O.S.NO.530/2011 ON THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANEKAL., BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL. THIS RFA, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree rendered by the Prl.Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal in O.S.No.530/2011 dated 03.07.2024 wherein the suit filed by the plaintiffs came to be dismissed. The same has been challenged under this appeal by urging various grounds. 2. Learned counsel Sri B.M.Mohan Kumar for the appellants is on record and has secured the services of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14981-DB RFA No. 2074 of 2024 learned Senior Counsel Sri Viveksubba Reddy who is present before the Court physically . 3. Learned counsel Sri Raghu R for respondent Nos.1 to 3 is present before the Court physically. 4. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants and counsel for respondents have filed joint petition of compromise under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC. The same reads as under: 1. The Respondents and one late Sri. Rajagopal Iyengar, S/o. Sri. Ramaswamy Iyengar are the children of Sri. Ramaswamy Iyengar and Smt. Rajalakshmi Iyengar W/o Ramaswamy Iyengar. The appellants namely Smt. Rajini W/o late Sri. Rajagopala Iyengar and Mr. Venugopal S/o late Sri. Rajagopala Iyengar are wife and son of Sri. Rajagopal Iyengar S/o Late Sri. Ramaswamy Iyengar. Sri. Ramaswamy Iyengar died on 24.04.2007 and Smt. Rajalakshmi Iyengar W/o late Sri. Ramaswamy Iyengar died on 23.06.2008 leaving behind the appellants and respondents as their legal heirs. It is submitted that during his lifetime, Sri. Ramaswamy Iyengar has sold an extent of 3 Acres 5 Guntas of agricultural land situated at Kudlu Village and he has shared/divided the sale consideration with the appellants, respondents and Smt. Rajalakshmi - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14981-DB RFA No. 2074 of 2024 Iyengar. Further, a site Property bearing Site No.365, Katha No.39/31/2 measuring East to West 52.9 ft + 43.4 ft + 20.8 ft and North to South 101.8ft situated at Kudlu Village, Kudlu Main Road, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District which is more fully described as “Schedule A Property” and herein after referred to as Schedule ‘A’ Property for the sake of convenience and Asbestos Sheet residential tenements/houses constructed thereupon was not divided among the children of Sri. Ramaswamy Iyengar and Smt. Rajalakshmi Iyengar W/o late Sri. Ramaswamy Iyengar, i.e., the appellants and respondents named above. 2. On 09.11.2011, the plaintiffs/appellants namely Smt. Rajini W/o late Sri Rajagopala Iyengar and Mr. Venugopal S/o late Sri. Rajagopala Iyengar filed a suit in O.S.No.530/2011 before the Hon’ble Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge at Anekal (“Trial Court”) against the respondents/defendants inter alia seeking for partition of the plaintiffs’ ¼ share in the Schedule-A property and other reliefs. 3. The respondents/defendants No.1 to 3 contested the said suit in O.S.No.530/2011 stating that Schedule-A property is not available for partition as contended by the appellants/plaintiffs. 4. The said suit in O.S.No.530/2011 was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 03.07.2024. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14981-DB RFA No. 2074 of 2024 Thereafter the appellants/plaintiffs filed the above appeal challenging the judgment and decree. 5. Now, at the intervention of the elders, well- wishers, family members, the appellants/plaintiffs and the respondents No.1 to 3/defendants to the above appeal have amicably resolved the matter in dispute inter-se and pray this Hon’ble court to record the same and pass modified decree in terms of this Compromise Application wherein the parties to the suit/appeal are agreed to partition the Schedule-A property equally between them. In terms of the arrangements, the Schedule-A property is divided into 4 parts and the share of the appellants, and the respondents is shown as per the Separate Sketches (two) annexed to this application. 6. The appellants/plaintiffs and the respondents/defendants no.1 to 3 withdraw all their claims, counter claims and allegations made against each other in this suit. All disputes have been fully and finally settled. 7. The parties i.e., the appellants/the respondents no.1 to 3 hereby confirm that they have absolute right, title, interest and possession in the respective shares allotted to them as per this compromise and they are entitled to utilize the property/share allotted to them in accordance with law. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:14981-DB RFA No. 2074 of 2024 8. The respondent No.1 to 3/defendants hereby represent and confirm that they have not created any third-party rights, mortgage, charge, entered into any agreement of sale or executed any power of attorney in respect of the Schedule-A property. 9. The parties to the suit in O.S.No.530/2011 and this appeal agree not to make any future claims against each other in pursuance of this compromise and this compromise shall be binding on all the parties to this dispute/s. The parties shall not re-open the suit in O.S.No.530/2011 or file any fresh suit questioning or disputing the above compromise. 10. The parties hereby and hereunder agree, declare confirm and acknowledge the good right, full power and absolute authority and indefeasible title of their respective shares to grant, convey, release, sell and transfer their respective share in Schedule-A property or otherwise deal with the same in any manner and on any terms as they shall or may think fit and proper and without the consent or concurrence of or any reference to other parties. 11. The parties i.e., the appellants/plaintiffs and the respondents No.1 to 3 / defendants shall do and cause to be done, execute and cause to be executed all further deeds, acts and things as may be necessary and that are reasonably and legally required for more fully and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:14981-DB RFA No. 2074 of 2024 perfectly assuring the right, title, interest and possession with respect their shares in the Schedule-A property. 12. The parties have got read, explained and understood all the terms of this compromise by their respective counsel in Kannada and English language. The parties acknowledge and confirm that they have executed this compromise petition out of their own free will and volition, without any misrepresentation, coercion, undue influence or duress. 13. The parties shall bear their respective costs of the suit and appeal. Wherefore, the appellants(plaintiffs) and the respondents (defendants) pray this Hon’ble Court be pleased to record this Compromise and pass judgment and decree in the terms of the above compromise petition and thereby modify the judgment and decree dated 03.07.2024 passed in O.S.No.560/2011, in terms of this Compromise, in the interest of justice and equity. Schedule ‘A’ Property All the piece and parcel of immovable property/site property bearing Site No.365, Katha No.39/31/2 measuring [East to West 52.9 ft + 43.4 ft + 20.8 ft and North to South 101.8ft] situated at Kudlu Village, Kudlu Main Road, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District and bounded on: - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:14981-DB RFA No. 2074 of 2024 East by : Vasanth Iyengar’s Property West by : Beerappa’s Property North by : Road South by : Papanna’s Property 5. The parties to the compromise petition are present before the Court physically and have subscribed their signatures in the presence of their respective counsel. The contents of the compromise have been read over and explained to them in Kannada and English language by their respective counsel and have entered into the above settlement out of their free will and volition and without coercion. The compromise petition is taken on record. 6. However, the Schedule ‘A’ property mentioned in the compromise petition depicts all that piece and parcel of immovable property / site property bearing Site No.365, Katha No.39/31/2 measuring East to West 52.9 ft + 43.4ft + 20.8ft and North to South 101.8ft situated at Kudlu Village, Kudlu Main Road, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District and bounded on East by Vasanth Iyengar’s - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:14981-DB RFA No. 2074 of 2024 property, West by Beerappa’s property, North by Road and South by Papanna’s property. 7. But, the ‘A’ Schedule property in O.S.No.530/2011 depicts as all that piece and parcel of the site bearing Site No.365, Katha No.39/31/2 situated at Kudlu Village, Kudlu Main Road, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore in which a residential house is constructed, total measuring East to West 49+27+20/3ft and North to South 99 feet bounded on East by Papanna’s property, West by Road, North by Vasanth Iyengar’s property and South by Beerappa’s property. 8. Learned counsel for the parties submits that since there is variation in the measurement of the property mentioned in the compromise petition and the measurement mentioned in the suit schedule property in O.S.No.530/2011, they submit that the parties to the suit restrict their claim as mentioned in the schedule property in O.S.No.530/2011. The submission is taken on record. However, the learned counsel for the parties are directed - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:14981-DB RFA No. 2074 of 2024 to submit modified sketch restricting the claim as mentioned in the Schedule A property of the suit. 9. In pursuance of the order passed by this Court on 02.04.2025, Respondent No.2 namely Smt.Jayashree, W/o Raghu Balan has filed affidavit stating that her husband Sri Raghu Balan is alive and due to typographical error in the judgment and decree dated 03.07.2024 passed in O.S.No.530/2011, the name of Sri Raghu Balan is shown late Raghu Balan. She has also produced copy of identity card issued by the Election Commission of India for the purpose of perusal. Accordingly, the affidavit is taken on record. The counsel for the parties are directed to rectify the crept in mistake keeping in view Section 152 C.P.C. 10. In a given peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the compromise petition is taken on record and we proceed to pass the following:
Decision
ORDER The appeal is disposed of. Consequently, the judgment and decree rendered by the Court below in O.S.No.530/2011 dated 03.07.2024 is hereby modified in - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:14981-DB RFA No. 2074 of 2024 terms of the compromise petition filed by the parties to the proceedings. Office to draw the decree accordingly. SD/- (K.SOMASHEKAR) JUDGE SD/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE DKB