IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY R.F.A.No.1006 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
Smt. Manjula V. Aged about 42 years, D/o. Venkatesh D. No.F6 and F7, 1 Floor No.47/1, Subbarama Chetty Road Nettakallappa Circle Basavanagudi Bengaluru - 560 004.
(By Smt. Umadevi H.R., Advocate) AND:
1. Sri.K. Jagannatha Aged about 55 years S/o. M. Keshavalu 2. Smt. C. Jayalakshmi Aged about 50 years W/o. K. Jagannatha Represented by her GPA Holder K. Jagannatha.
Both residing at No.294, 4th Cross, Sachidananda Nagar, Rajarajeshwari Nagar …Appellant Bengaluru – 560 098.
(By Sri. Raghavendra K. Advocate for C/Respondents 1 and 2) Respondents **** This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the judgment and decree dated:25-02-2019 passed in O.S.No.508/2017 on the file of the III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, (CCH-25), partly decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for ejectment.
This Regular First Appeal coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R It is a defendant’s appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 25-02-2019 passed by the learned III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, (CCH-25) (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the “Trial Court”) in O.S.No.508/2017, wherein the Trial Court had ordered the defendant to quit, vacate and handover the vacant possession of the suit schedule shops to the plaintiffs within three months from the date of the said judgment.
2. During the pendency of this appeal, the parties have entered into a compromise and today, through their respective learned counsels, both parties have filed an application under Order XXIII, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
3. The appellant and respondent No.1 who is also a General Power of Attorney holder for Respondent No.2 have been identified by their respective learned counsels.
4. Learned counsels from both side make supporting submissions on the lines of the compromise petition and pray this Court to dispose of this appeal on the terms of the compromise petition filed today.
5. Perused the application filed by both side under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
6. The parties have agreed to the following terms:-
1. Appellant has agreed to vacate and hand over the vacant possession of the Schedule property on or before 06/11/2020 to the Respondents.
2. During the period of one year appellant shall continue to pay rent of Rs.22,030/- (Twenty Two Thousand Thirty Rupees only) per month regularly to the Respondents without making default.
3. During the period of one year Respondents will not interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Appellant with respect to Schedule property.
4. Respondents agreed to return the advance amount of Rs.3,50,000/- (Three Lakh Fifty Thousand Rupees only) to the Appellant at the time of handing over the vacant possession of the Schedule Property.
5. Appellant undertake to vacate the Schedule Property voluntarily on the expiry of agreed period i.e. 6/11/2020.
6. In view of the Compromise, the court fee paid may be kindly be ordered to be refunded to the Appellant.
7. Both the parties undertake not to seek any modification/seek time to vacate the schedule property.”
7. Enquired the parties who are present in person who submit that they have entered into a compromise out of their free consent without any force, coercion or undue influence and also by keeping their interest under consideration. It is convinced that the parties have entered into a compromise out of their own volition from out of free consent. The terms of the compromise which have been reproduced above since are in accordance with law, the compromise petition can be accepted and appeal can be disposed of on the terms of the compromise petition.
8. In view of the above, the impugned judgment and decree dated 25-02-2019 passed by the learned III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, (CCH-25) in O.S.No.508/2017, which is challenged in this appeal stands modified on the terms of the compromise petition which have been reproduced at point Nos.1 to 5 and 7 above.
The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. Draw the modified decree accordingly.
In view of disposal of the matter as settled between the parties, the refund of Court Fee, if any, to the appellant, to be in accordance with law.
In view of disposal of the main appeal itself, the pending interlocutory application I.A.No.1/2019 does not survive for consideration.
Sd/-
JUDGE BMV*