IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.2124 of 2012 (MON) BETWEEN:
M.V.SRINIVASA GOWDA, S/O VENKAPPA GOWDA, SINCE DEAD BY LRs., M.S. DEVARAJA, S/O SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O TUMBRIMANE, MALUVADI, NALUR POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK – 577 432.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI U.PANDURANGA NAYAK, ADVOCATE) AND:
SUBRAYA NAIKA H.S., SINCE DEAD BY LRS, 1. CHINNAMMA, W/O LATE SUBRAYA NAIKA, SINCE DEAD BY LRs., 2. PRABHAKARA U.S., S/O LATE SUBRAYA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 3. SARASWATHI U.S., D/O LATE SUBRAYA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 4. RATHNAKARA U.S., S/O LATE SUBRAYA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 5. KALAVATHI U.S., D/O LATE SUBRAYA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, 6. HEMAVATHI U.S., D/O LATE SUBRAYA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, 7. POORNESH U.S., S/O LATE SUBRAYA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, 8. NEELAVATHI @ LAKSHMIDEVI U.S., D/O LATE SUBRAYA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDENT OF C/O PRABHAKARA U.S., RANJADAKATTE VILLAGE, DOORVASAPURA POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK-577 432, SHIMOGA DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N.K. RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R4 IS SERVED; NOTICE ISSUED TO R3, R5, R6, R7 & R8 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 21.04.2012 PASSED IN R.A.No.365/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, SHIMOGA, FAST TRACK COURT II, SHIMOGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.08.2009 PASSED IN OS.No.113/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) & C.J.M., SHIMOGA.
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Both appellant No.2 and respondent No.4 have filed an interim application of compromise under Order 23 Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure for having settled the dispute amicably out of the Court. Respondent No.4 also files a letter authorizing respondent No.4 by respondent Nos.2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 for entering into a compromise.
2. Heard the counsels as well as the parties.
3. This appeal is filed by the appellants assailing the judgment and decree passed by the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and CJM, Shimoga, in O.S.No.113/2005 dated 04.08.2009 decreeing the suit by directing the appellants to pay Rs.1,04,667/- along with future interest at 6% per annum compounded yearly rests. Being not satisfied with the same, the defendants filed the appeal before the District and Sessions Judge, Shimoga, in RA.No.365/2009, wherein the appeal came to be allowed in part. However, confirmed decree of the claim amount of Rs.1,04,667/-, but modified the interest at 6% pa from the date of suit till the date of realization. Being aggrieved by the same, the defendants are before this Court in this second appeal. During the pendency of appeal, when the matter came up for admission, both the parties have settled the matter and filed the compromise application under Order 23 Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure.
4. As per the terms of compromise, appellant No.2 paid Rs.1,10,000/- towards full and final settlement to the respondents and handed over DD.No.395373 dated 02.11.2019 to respondent No.4. It is authorized by other parties.
5. The terms of compromise entered into between the parties are as under:
“The appellant and the respondents beg to state as under:
1. The 2nd appellant and the respondents duly represented by the 4th respondent herein have compromised the lis involved in this regular second appeal in the following terms:
(i) In full and final settlement of the amount decreed in O.S.No.113/2005 dated 4.08.2009 in O.S.No.113/2005 passed by the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) & CJM, Shimoga, as modified by the judgment and decree dated 21.4.2012 passed by the District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court-II), Shimoga in R.A.No.365/2009, the respondents here by agree and accept a total sum of Rs.1,10,000/- (Rupees one lakh ten thousand only) by a Demand Draft No.395373 dated 2.11.2019 drawn on State Bank of India, tendered by the 2nd appellant in this Hon’ble Court.
(ii) The 2nd appellant also agreeable for this Hon’ble Court to pass an order for refund of the Court fee as ordered by this Hon’ble Court to be paid to the 4th respondent for and on behalf of the respondents herein.
(iii) The appellants and the respondents pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to accept this compromise petition and in modification of the judgment and decree passed by the courts below, a decree may be drawn in this regular second appeal in terms of this compromise petition”.
6. The compromise entered into between the parties is in accordance with law and there is no legal embargo in accepting the settlement. Accordingly, memo of settlement is accepted. The matter has been settled between the parties in terms of the compromise.
7. It is also noted that the appellant is entitled for refund of court fee as per Section 66(2)(c) of the Karnataka Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958. However, in terms of settlement, the refund of 75% of court fee is ordered, which is payable to the respondents.
Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise.
Draw decree accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE PB