IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.1940 OF 2016 C/W REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.1957 OF 2016 In RFA No.1940/2016 BETWEEN:
Smt. Ambika Aged about 58 years, W/o. B.N.Venugopal, R/o. Kadiganahalli Village, Jala Hobli, Bettahalasoor Post, Bengaluru North Taluk-562157. (By Sri. K.Suman, Advocate) AND:
1. Smt. Sanjeevamma, Aged about 81 years, W/o. Late Anjinappa, 2. Smt. Bhagya B.A., Aged about 50 years, W/o. Sudarshan, 3. Smt. Saraswathi B.A., …Appellant Aged about 55 years, W/o. Krishnappa, Respondents 1 to 3 are R/o.Muthagadahalli Village, Jala Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk-562157.
4. Sri. B.A.Prakash, Aged about 61 years, S/o. Late Anjinappa, 5. Smt. Nalini, Aged about 53 years, W/o. B.A.Prakash, Respondents 4 & 5 are R/o.No.108, 2nd Main, 11th A Cross, A – Sector, Yelahanka New Town, Bengaluru-560064.
... Respondents (By Sri. C.M.Nagabhushana, Advocate for R4 & R5) This RFA is filed under Order XLI Rule 1 read with Section 96 of the CPC, against the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2016 passed in O.S.No.2915/2006 on the file of the I Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH No.2), dismissing the suit for partition and separate possession.
In RFA No.1957/2016 BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Sanjeevamma, Aged about 78 years, W/o. Late Anjinappa, 2. Smt. Bhagya B.A., Aged about 47 years, W/o. Sudarshan, 3. Smt. Saraswathi B.A., Aged about 52 years, W/o. Krishnappa, All are R/at Muthagadahalli Village, Jala Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru-562157.
(By Sri. B.Ravindra Prasad, Advocate) AND:
1. Sri. B.A.Prakash, Aged about 58 years, S/o. Late Anjinappa, 2. Smt. Nalini, Aged about 50 years, W/o. B.A.Prakash, Both are R/at No.108, 2nd Main, 11th A Cross, A – Sector, Yelahanka New Town, Bengaluru-560064.
3. Smt. Ambika Aged about 55 years, W/o. B.N.Venugopal, R/at. Kadiganahalli Village, Jala Hobli, Bettahalasoor Post, …Appellants Bengaluru North Taluk-562157. .. Respondents (By Sri. C.M.Nagabhushana, Advocate for R1) This RFA is filed under Section 96 of CPC, against the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2016 passed in O.S.No.2915/2006 on the file of the I Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, dismissing the suit for partition and separate possession.
These appeals coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:
COMMON ORDER ON COMPROMISE PETITION In RFA No.1940/2016, notice on respondent Nos.1 to 3 has not been served, but they are present before the Court today. In RFA No.1957/2016, respondent Nos.2 and 3 are not yet served with notice, but they are present before the Court.
2. These two appeals arise out of judgment in O.S.No.2915/2006 on the file of I Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Therefore in connection with these two appeals the parties present a compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC. All the parties have signed this compromise petition. The Advocates for the parties have also signed the compromise petition. Contents of the compromise petition are read over and explained to the parties in Kannada language. They admit the correctness of the compromise petition. They also submit that they have voluntarily entered into this compromise without any kind of force or compulsion from anybody else. A sketch is annexed to the compromise petition. This compromise discloses certain shares being allotted to each party and the shares allotted to each of them being separately described with boundaries. Compromise is lawful and therefore it is accepted. Draw final decree according to compromise petition.
Sd/- JUDGE KMV/-
Ct-bl