IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.493 of 2013 C/W REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.2140 of 2011(RES) IN RSA No.493 of 2013 BETWEEN 1. CHIKKA HANUMAPPA, DEAD BY LR’s., 1(a). SMT. MANJULA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, W/O. LATE CHIKKA HANUMAPPA, 1(b). C. HARISH BABU, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, S/O LATE CHIKKA HANUMAPPA, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT LAKKAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SIDAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT – 562 102.
...APPELLANTS (BY SRI C.M. NAGABUSHANA & SRI K.S. UDAY, ADVOCATES) AND 1. MUNIPPA, SINCE DEAD BY LR’s., (a). SMT. MUNIYAMMA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, W/O. LATE MUNIPPA, SINCE DEAD BY LRs 1(b) AND (c), (b) SMT. MUNIVENKATAMMA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, W/O. SRI MUNISHAMAPPA, RESIDENT OF HOSAHUDYA VILLAGE, KESHAVARA POST, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK & DISTRICT-562 101.
(c). SMT. DYAVAMMA, MAJOR IN AGE, W/O. VENKATAPPA, RAMGANAPARTHY VILLAGE, GOLLARAHALLI POST, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-562 101.
2. MANJUNATH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA, RESIDENT OF LAKKAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-562 102.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N. HARIPRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1(a-c) AND R2;
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 08.06.2011 PASSED IN R.S.No.54 of 2004 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., CHINTHAMANI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.04.2004 PASSED IN O.S.No.268 of 1992 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC., AND ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) C.C. SIDLAGHATTA.
IN RSA No.2140 of 2011 BETWEEN 1. CHIKKA HANUMAPPA, DEAD BY LR’s., 1(a). SMT. MANJULA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, W/O. LATE CHIKKA HANUMAPPA, 1(b). C. HARISH BABU, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, S/O LATE CHIKKA HANUMAPPA, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT LAKKAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SIDAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT – 562 102.
...APPELLANTS (BY SRI C.M. NAGABUSHANA & SRI K.S. UDAY, ADVOCATES) AND 1. MUNIPPA, SINCE DEAD BY LR’s., (a). SMT. MUNIYAMMA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, W/O. LATE MUNIPPA, RESIDENT OF LAKKAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT–562 102. SINCE DEAD BY LRs 1(b) AND (c), (b) SMT. MUNIVENKATAMMA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, W/O. LATE SRI MUNISHAMAPPA, RESIDENT OF HOSAHUDYA VILLAGE, KESHAVARA POST, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK & DISTRICT-562 101.
(c). SMT. DYAVAMMA, MAJOR IN AGE, W/O. VENKATAPPA, RAMGANAPARTHY VILLAGE, GOLLARAHALLI POST, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-562 101.
2. SMT. MANJULA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, W/O. MUNIVENKATAPPA, RESIDENT OF LAKKAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-562 102.
3. MANJUNATHA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA, RESIDENT OF LAKKAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-562 102.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N. HARIPRASAD, ADVOCATE for R1 (a, c) AND R3; R2 IS SERVED;
NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT TO R1 (b) VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 27.09.2012.) THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 08.06.2011 PASSED IN R.S.No.53 of 2004 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., CHINTHAMANI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.04.2004 PASSED IN O.S.No.145 of 1993 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC., AND ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) (CONCURRENT CHARGES), SIDLAGHATTA.
THESE REGULAR SECOND APPEALs COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT RSA No.493/2013 is filed by the appellants assailing the judgment and decree dated 08.06.2011 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Chintamani (hereinafter referred to as ‘First Appellate Court’) in RA No.54/2004 for having confirmed the judgment and decree dated 17.04.2004 passed in OS.No.268/1992 by the Civil Judge, Sidlaghatta (hereinafter referred to as ‘Trial Court’).
RSA No.2140/2011 is filed by the appellants assailing the judgment and decree dated 08.06.2011 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Chintamani in RA No.53/2004 for having confirmed the judgment and decree dated 17.04.2004 passed by the Civil Judge, Sidlaghatta in OS No.145/1993 dismissing the suit of the plaintiff/appellant for specific performance of the contract.
2. During the pendency of these appeals, the parties have appeared before the Court along with their respective counsel and filed compromise application under Order 23 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’). Both appellant No.1(a) and (b) along with their counsel are present in Court and also respondent Nos.1(b) and (c) and respondent No.2 along with their counsel are present in Court.
3. Perused the compromise application filed by the parties.
4. The terms of the compromise are as under: “ Terms of Compromise:
(i) The respondents hereby withdraw all the allegations made by them against the appellants herein.
(ii) The respondents hereby withdraw all their claim or whatsoever made by them against the appellant in O.S No.268/1992, with regard to alleged Mortgage Deed dated 27.09.1982.
(iii) The respondents hereby admit the execution of sale agreement dated 27.09.1982 said to have been executed by Munipapa @ Muniyappa deceased appellant Chikkahanumappa.
(iv) The respondents hereby consent for decreeing of the suit in O.S
performance of the Agreement of Sale dated 27.09.1982.
(v) The appellants herein have, this day paid a sum of Rs.2,50,000-00 (Rupees Two lakhs Fifty Thousand only) in the following manner to the
performance of Sale Agreement dated 27.09.1982.
PAYMENTS:
a) A sum of Rs.2,00,000-00 (Rupees Two Lakhs only) to the 2nd respondent Sri.Manjunatha, vide Demand Draft bearing No.515158 drawn on ICICI Bank, M.G. Road Branch, Bengaluru.
b) A sum of Rs.25,000-00 (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the Respondent No.1(b) Smt.Munivenkatamma, vide Demand Draft bearing No.515157, drawn on ICICI Bank, M.G. Road Branch, Bengaluru.
c) A sum of Rs.25,000-00 (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the Respondent No.1(c) Smt.Dyavamma, vide Demand Draft bearing No.515159, drawn on ICICI Bank, M.G. Road Branch, Bengaluru.
The respondents hereby admit and acknowledge the receipt of Rs.2,50,000- 00 (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) in the manner stated above in full and final settlement in terms of this Compromise Petition and towards Sale consideration in respect of suit schedule property.
(vi) The respondents hereby declare that hence forth they have no claim or whatsoever in respect of the suit schedule property. The appellants are entitled to approach the concerned Revenue Authority for registry of mutation of the plaint schedule property in their favour. The respondents have no claim or objections whatsoever for nature for change of khata from the Tahsildar.
(vii) The respondents hereby undertake to execute register sale deed in favour of the appellants herein within One Month from today.
(viii) It is agreed between both the parties that, in case the respondents fail to execute and register the sale deed as stated above. The appellant is at liberty to get the Sale Deed executed through Court by filing Execution Petition without their being any notice to them and they are liable for cost of such proceedings.”
5. The parties admit the above terms of the compromise and submit that they have entered into a compromise out of their free will and volition. There is no force, coercion or undue influence of any sort or by anybody on either of the parties.
6. As per the terms of the compromise, the decree of the Trial Court passed in the suit filed by the plaintiff in OS No.268/1992 requires to be reversed and suit is dismissed and judgment passed in OS No.145/1993 requires to be reversed and suit is decreed. The compromise is in accordance with law. There is no legal embargo for accepting the compromise. Accordingly, the compromise application is accepted.
7. The respondent Nos.1(b) and (c) acknowledge the receipt of Rs.25,000/- each and respondent No.2. also acknowledges receipt of Rs.2,00,000/- before the Court by way of demand draft. In view of the aforesaid compromise between the parties, the appeals are disposed of. In terms of the compromise, the suit in OS No.268/1992 is hereby dismissed and suit in OS No.145/1993 is hereby decreed. The respondents shall execute the sale deed within one month from today.
Draw up the decree accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE mv