IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR M.F.A.No.2467/2015 BETWEEN 1. SMT.CHANDRAMMA, W/O VENKATARAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT # 91, RAMAKRISHNA BLOCK, I CROSS, K.S.COLONY, THYAGARAJANAGARA, BENGALURU 560 028.
2. MASTER DHEERAJ S/O LATE CHANDREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS, R/AT #91, RAMAKRISHNA BLOCK, I CROSS, K.S.COLONY, THAYAGARAJANAGARA, BENGALURU-560028.
3. KUMARI DEEPIKA D/O LATE CHANDREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, BOTH ARE MINORS, REP.BY N.G.CHANDRAMMA, R/AT #91, RAMAKRISHNA, BLOCK, I CROSS, K.S.COLONY, THAYAGARAJANAGARA, BENGALURU-560028. ... APPELLANTS (By Sri DEEPAK J., ADV.) AND SMT.SAROJAMMA, W/O V.VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEAS, R/AT DODDAKANNAHALLI VILLAGE, CARMELRAM POST, SARJAPURA ROAD, DODDAKANNALI, BENGALURU 560 035. ... RESPONDENT (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.4.12.2017) (By Sri UMESH B.N., ADV.) THIS MFA FILED U/S 47(a) OF GUARDIAN AND WARDS ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:6.2.2015 PASSED IN G & WC.NO.56/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED U/SEC 10 OF THE GUARDIAN & WARDS ACT, 1890.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is preferred by mother of Late Venkatesh challenging the judgment and decree passed by the III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru in G & WC No.56/2014 whereunder petition filed by her under Section 10 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 to declare and appoint her as guardian of minor children viz., Master Dheeraj and Kumari Deepika came to be dismissed and petition filed by mother and natural guardian Smt.Sarojamma in G&WC No.27/2012 came to be allowed.
2. Today, learned advocates appearing for parties have filed a compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC whereunder appellant and respondent have agreed to the terms set out in the compromise petition. It is stated thereunder that appellant would not make any claim as against death benefits/service benefits of her deceased son Venkatesh and she has no objection for respondent i.e., Smt. Sarojamma W/o. Venkatesh to receive death benefits/service benefits by herself and also on behalf of her minor children from the employer of deceased viz., Central Silk Board. Appellant has also admitted and acknowledged the order passed in G & WC No.27/2012 whereunder Smt. Sarojamma came to be appointed as guardian of minor wards. Terms agreed to between the parties under the compromise petition reads as under:
“1. That the appellant herein being Grand Mother of minor wards had filed G&WC 56/2014 under Section 10 of the Guardian & Wards Act, 1890 to declare and appoint her as guardian of Minor Wards Master Dheeraj & Kum. Deepika on the file of the Court of III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore.
2. Similarly, the respondent herein being mother of minor children, had filed case in G&WC No.27/2012 on the file of the Court of III Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Bangalore, under Sections 6 and 7 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act seeking to declare and appoint her as the guardian of Minor Children Master Dheeraj & Kum Deepika.
3. The Hon’ble Trial Court was pleased to pass common order in both cases wherein allowed the petition in G&WC 27/2012 filed by the respondent herein and declared and appointed as Natural Guardian of Minor Children Master Dheeraj and Kumari Deepika and entitled to continue the permanent custody of minor children further held that the respondent is entitled to get the death benefits of Late Venkatesh. V, on behalf of the Minor Children from Central Silk Board.
4. Whereas the petition filed by the appellant herein in G&WC 56/2014 came to be dismissed.
5. Against the said order of dismissal of the petition in G&WC 56/2014 the appellant herein has preferred the above appeal challenging the same.
6. Whereas now at the intervention of well wishers and friends, the appellant and respondent herein have arrived at settlement, and willing to compromise as detailed below and accordingly, submitting this compromise petition requesting this Hon’ble Court to record the same and to pass appropriate orders in terms of this compromise petition.
7. The appellant declares that she shall not make any claim as against the death benefits / service benefits of her son Late Venkatesh. V and she has no objection for the respondent (who is none other than wife of Venkatesh. V) and minor wards to receive the death benefits /service benefits from Central Silk Board and the appellant acknowledges the order passed in G&WC 27/2012 wherein the respondent has been appointed as Guardian of Minor Wards.
8. If any anticipated compassionate Appointment is given by the Central silk Board, the same shall be sought for only in favour of the minor ward Master Dheeraj and not in the name of respondent herein.
9. The appellant and respondent herein withdraw all the allegations made against each other.
10. The appellant and respondent herein affirm and declare that the compromise entered into in the above case is in their best interest and also that of the Wards 11. The parties have entered into this compromise out of their free will and volition and there is no fcoercision or undue influence. The parties agree and declare that the terms of the compromise are fair and just.”
3. Both parties viz., appellant and respondent are present before Court and they admit the execution of compromise petition and have stated that after having understood the contents of compromise petition, which has been read over to them and explained by their respective learned advocates they have affixed their signatures without any threat, force or coercion and out of their own free will and volition they have affixed their signatures. Parties present before the Court are also identified by their respective learned advocates who affixed their signatures to the compromise petition. In that view of the matter, we are of the view there is no impediment to accept the said compromise petition.
4. Hence, we proceed to pass the following:
JUDGMENT a. Compromise petition filed under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC is hereby accepted.
b. Appeal stands disposed of. Judgment and decree passed in G&WC No.56/2014 dated 06.02.2015 is substituted in terms as agreed to between the parties. Registry is directed to draw the decree accordingly.
I.A.1/2015 filed for stay does not survive for consideration.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE VP