N. BALARAJU v. SMT. S. LALITHAMMA

1. SMT. S. LALITHAMMA W/O SHANMUGAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/A NO.59, HABIBULLA, SAHIB STREET, JAN BAZAR, TRIPLICANE, MADRAS-600005

2. N. MUNIRAJU S/O LATE A. NARAYANA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

3. SMT. NALINI W/O LATE VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R2 & R3 R/O NO.110, K.M.NAGANNA ROAD, CUBBONPET MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560002 GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:20901 RFA No. 1256 of 2009

4. S. RAMESH S/O LATE SHANMUGAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/A NO.59, HABIBULLA SAHIB STREET, JAN BAZAAR, TRIPLICANE, CHENNAI-600005 (BY SRI. NANJUNDARADHYA B.G., ADV. FOR R1 & R4, R2 & R3 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED.) …RESPONDENTS THIS RFA IS FILED U/S 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.9.2009 PASSED IN O.S.NO.3722/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH NO.39), DISMISSING THE SEPARATE SUIT POSSESSION. FOR DECLARATION, PARTITION & THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This is plaintiff's appeal challenging judgment and decree dated 10th September 2009 passed by XXXVIII Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore City in O.S. no.3722/2001, whereunder suit for declaration against release deed was dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for parties submit that during pendency of this appeal, parties have entered into compromise, whereunder respondents no.1 and 4 have voluntarily agreed to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and plaintiff/appellant has agreed to receive same towards full and final settlement and withdraw - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:20901 RFA No. 1256 of 2009 his claim over schedule property and concedes to impugned decree. Accordingly, compromise petition dated 12th June 2024 is filed and same is taken on record. The terms of compromise petition are as under: i) It is submitted that Appellant has preferred the above appeal against the respondents challenging the Judgment & Decree dated 10-09-2009 passed by the learned XXXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCCH-39) in dismissing O.S. No.3722/2001 filed by the Appellant seeking for partition and other reliefs in respect of the property more fully described in the schedule hereunder. ii) It is submitted that the Respondent No.2 & 3 have been placed ex-parte and they have not claimed any right, title or share over the schedule property either before this Hon'ble court or before the Trial Court. The respondent No.2 died as bachelor on 07.04.2021 and contently, he has no legal heirs. Thus, the Respondents No.1 & 4 are the only contesting parties in the above lis. iii) It is submitted that now at the intervention of the friends and well-wishers the Appellant and the Respondent No.1 & 4 herein have amicably settled the dispute in respect of the schedule property on the following terms and conditions: a) That without conceding or admitting that the Appellant has right, title or a share in the schedule property, but putting an end to the prolonged litigation, Respondents No.1 & 4 have voluntarily agreed to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the Appellant as full and - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:20901 RFA No. 1256 of 2009 settlement. The Appellant has agreed and accepted for the aforesaid settlement and withdraw his claim over the schedule property. b) In terms of the clause 2(a) above, the Respondents No.1 & 4 have issued a DD bearing No.133413, dated 28-03-2024, drawn on IOB, Triplicane, Chennai Branch for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) to the Appellant. Appellant hereby acknowledges the receipt of the said amount. c) Appellant hereby confirms the execution of Release Deed dated 04.03.1993 executed by him in favour of Respondents No.1 & 4 in respect of the schedule property. d) Appellant hereby admits and confirms the right, title, interest and possession of Respondents No.1 & 4 over the schedule property. e) Appellant hereby declares that he has no claim whatsoever against Respondents No.1 & 4 in respect of the schedule property. f) The parties herein have agreed that they will not re- open this compromise petition at any cost and they would abide by this compromise. g) The parties hereby declare that there is no threat, undue influence, coercion to file this compromise petition. h) The parties further declare that the contents of this compromise petition have been explained to the parties - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:20901 RFA No. 1256 of 2009 in the language known to them and the parties have affixed their signatures. WHEREFORE, the Appellant and the Respondent No.1 & 4 respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow this Compromise Petition in the above terms and dismiss the appeal, to meet the ends of justice. SCHEDULE Property situated at Amruthahalli village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, Gramatana Katha No.338 and property bearing No.37, 38 and each property measuring 30 x 40 feet, measuring East to West 60 feet, North to South 40 feet, bounded on East by - Property No.36 West by - 30 feet Road North by - 25 feet Road South by - Property bearing No.39 & 40

3. Parties are present and are identified by their respective counsel.

4. On interaction, parties stated that they have been explained terms of compromise and after understanding same, they have affirmed same out of their free will and volition without there being any threat, coercion or undue influence from anybody. Appellant acknowledges receipt of Demand Draft - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:20901 RFA No. 1256 of 2009 for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) as per paragraph - 3(b) of compromise petition.

5. I have perused terms of settlement. Same are found to be lawful.

6. In view of above, I pass following: O R D E R i) Appeal is disposed off in terms of compromise petition. Impugned judgment and decree dated 10th September 2009 passed by trial Court in O.S. no.3722/2001 is modified accordingly. ii) iii) Registry to draw decree incorporating terms of compromise. In view of disposal of appeal as settled, Registry is directed to refund admissible court-fee to appellant. Sd/- JUDGE GSS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1