IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR R.F.A.NO.1226 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
1. Bora @ Boregowda S/o Halagi Boregowda Aged about 37 years 2. Hucha S/o Halagi Boregowda Aged about 35 years Both are residing at Somanahalli village Koppa Hobli, Maddur Taluk Mandya District – 571 425 …Appellants (By Sri S.Raghavendra, Advocate) AND:
1. Smt. Sarojamma W/o Late Sri Rama Aged about 48 years Presently R/at No.1788 1st Main Road Sir M.Vishveshwaraiah Layout 1st Block, Nagadevanahalli Bengaluru – 560 056.
2. G. Nagaraju S/o Gangaiah Aged about 49 years Ra/t No.341 (Part of Sy.No.31/1) Gidadhakonenahalli Yeshwanthapura Hobli Bengaluru North Taluk Bengaluru – 560 091 Also R/at Manjushree Associates Nagaraj G, Advocate No.363, Upstairs 4th Main, Vijayanagar Bengaluru – 560 040 3. Smt. Jayalakshmi W/o Ramesh Aged about 42 years R/o Somanahalli village Koppa Hobli, Maddur Taluk Mandya District – 571 425 ... Respondents (R1 – Sarojamma Present;
R2- Nagaraju G, Present & R3 – served) This RFA is filed under Section 96 of CPC against the order dated 11.08.2015 passed in FDP No.209/2011 on the file of the XXXVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, allowing the petition and ordering to draw final decree in terms of compromise decree passed in O.S.No.3057/2009 on 18.07.2011.
This appeal coming on orders this day, the Court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT Heard the appellant’s counsel on maintainability of the appeal, an objection raised by the registry. The appellants were not parties in the suit O.S.No.3057/2009 and the final decree proceedings in FDP No.209/2011 initiated consequent to preliminary decree passed in the said suit. It appears that in the final decree proceedings, the parties entered into compromise and final decree was ordered to be drawn. The appellants want to challenge the said compromise accepted in the final decree proceedings.
2. Already the appellants have filed an appeal in RFA No.108/2015, challenging the preliminary decree in O.S.No.3057/2009. Therefore, the appellants need not prefer an appeal questioning the compromise. If at all the appellants have any interest in the properties, the same will be decided in RFA No.108/2015 and the validity of compromise reported in FDP 209/2011 is subject to final decision in RFA 108/2015. Hence this appeal is not maintainable, it is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE KMV/-