IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. SUDHINDRARAO R.S.A.No.1232/2010 C/W R.S.A.No.1208/2009 IN R.S.A.No.1232/2010 BETWEEN:
SMT.PUTTATHAYAMMA W/O M.D.NAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT SETTYHALLI KASABA HOBLI MADHUGIRI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 132. (BY SRI HARISH H V, ADVOCATE) AND:
SMT.K C INDIRA W/O CHINNAKOTAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LRS.
a) SRI CHINNAKOTAPPA S/O LATE GUNDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS b) SATHISH S/O CHINNAKOTAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS …APPELLANT BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF GANESH NILAYA BEHIND SPRING AQUA SK MINARAL WATER 80 FEET ROAD, MANJUNATHANAGAR NEAR BATAVADI, TUMKUR TOWN.
c) C P LATHA D/O CHINNAKOTAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS LECTURER, H.M.S. POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, SHETTIHALLI MAIN ROAD TUMKUR.
d) KAVITHA D/O CHINNAKOTAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT RANGANAHALLI, DODDERI HOBLI, MADHUGIRI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT.
AMENDENT CARRIED OUT AS PER COURT ORDER DTD.07.3.2019.
(BY SRI K N NITISH, FOR SRI K V NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE) ...RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:13.4.2010 PASSED IN R.A.No.78/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL, SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AND JMFC, MADHUGIRI, ALLOWING THE APPEAL SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:28.2.2002 PASSED IN O.S.No.321/1989 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE, (JR.DN.) & JMFC, MADHUGIRI.
IN R.S.A.No.1208/2009:
BETWEEN:
SMT.K C INDIRAMMA W/O CHINNAKOTAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HER LRs a) SRI CHINNAKOTAPPA S/O LATE GUNDEGOWDA AGED 78 YEARS C/O H R JAYAPRAKASH D/O No.10, SRIRANGA NILAYA SRINIDHI BADAVANE CHANNAPANAPALYA MAIN ROAD TUMKUR.
b) SRI SATHEESH S/O SRI CHINNAKOTAPPA AGED 49 YEARS C/O H R JAYAPRAKASH D/O No.10, SRIRANGA NILAYA SRINIDHI BADAVANE CHANNAPANAPALYA MAIN ROAD TUMKUR.
c) C.P LATHA S/O SRI CHINNAKOTAPPA, AGED 51 YEARS LECTURER, H.M.S. POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, SHETTIHALLI MAIN ROAD TUMKUR.
d) K C KAVITHA D/O CHINNAKOTAPPA AGED 45 YEARS R/A RANGAPURA VILLAGE, DODDERI HOBLI, MADHUGIRI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT.
CAUSE TITLE AMENDED AS PER VIDE ORDER DTD.2.3.2018.
(BY SRI K N NITISH, FOR SRI K V NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE) …APPELLANTS AND:
SMT.PUTTATHAYAMMA W/O M.D.NAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT SETTIHALLI KASABA HOBLI MADHUGIRI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 132.
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI HARISH H V, ADVOCATE FOR CAVEATOR RESPONDENT) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.06.2009 PASSED IN R.A.No.05/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) AND JMFC, MADHUGIRI, ALLOWING THE APPEAL SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:31.10.2000 PASSED IN O.S.No.270/1989 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE, (JR.DN.) MADHUGIRI.
THESE RSAs COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT As both the appeals are related to same subject matter for different reasons, they are taken up together for disposal. Sri. K.V.Narasimhan, files vakalath for respondents. The same is taken on record.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for respondent in both the cases are present. They submit that the matter is settled through a compromise. They further submit that schedule property is not a granted land or the one where the Government is having substantial interest. It is submitted that the suit for declaration of title and injunction in O.S.NO.321/1989 on the file of the learned Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC, Madhugiri filed by the appellant in RSA.No.1232/2010 gets dismissed as settled out of court. Insofar as O.S.NO.270/1989 which is a suit for specific performance under which the defendant has agreed to execute the sale deed in terms of the agreement connected to RSA 1208/2009. Thus RSA No.1232/2010 gets decreed. To that effect, the Compromise Petition dated 7.3.2019 is filed under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC duly signed by the parties and attested by their respective counsel and the same is taken on record.
(original Compromise petition filed is kept in the first appeal and copy in the later).
3. The Compromise petition dated 7.3.2019 read as under:
1. At the intervention of the elders, well wishers and the advocates on record, the parties have compromised the above matter on following terms and conditions.
2. The respondent herein (Smt. K.C. Indira) had filed a suit in O.S.No.321/1989 on the file of the Addl. Civil Judge(J.D) & JMFC at Madhugiri for the relief of declaration, delivery of possession and other reliefs with respect suit schedule property Sy.No.122/A, measuring 3 acre 15 guntas and Sy.No.123/A, measuring 3 acre 18 guntas, both land situated at Maviladaku village, Puravara Hobli, Madhugiri Taluk, the suit came to be dismissed. Against the said dismissal of the suit the respondent herein (Smt.K.C.Indira) filed a Regular Appeal.No.78/2002, before the Prl.Civil Judge (Sr.Dn)&JMFC at Madhugiri.
The Regular Appeal.No.78/2002 also came to be allowed and decreed the suit of plaintiff. The appellant herein (Smt.Puttathayamma) in R.S.A.No.1232/2010, before this Hon’ble Court. In view of this settlement, the LRs of the deceased respondent (Smt.K.C.Indira) have no objection for allowing R.S.A.No.1232/2010 and dismiss the suit in O.S.No.321/1989 in its entirety.
3. The appellant herein (Smt.Puttathayamma) had filed a suit in O.S.No.270/1989 on the file of the Addl. Civil Judge (J.D) & JMFC at Madhugiri for the relief of Specific performance of the agreement dated 15.12.1983 seeking direction to the defendants to execute a proper registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff relating to the suit lands and if she fails to execute the deed, the Hon’ble court may kindly execute the sale deed and Permanent injunction, with respect suit schedule property Sy.No.122/B, measuring 3 acre 15 guntas and Sy.No.123/B, measuring 3 acres 18 guntas, both lands situated at Maviladaku village, Puravara Hobli, Madhugiri Taluk, Tumakuru District. The suit came to be decreed partly. Against which, the appellant herein/ Smt.Puttathayamma filed a Regular Appeal.No.5/2001, before Civil Judge (Sr.Dv) & JMFC at Madhugiri. The Regular Appeal.No.5/2001 also came to be allowed and decreed the suit of plaintiff. Against the said order, the Smt.K.C.Indira filed R.S.A.NO.1208/2009, before this Hon’ble court. In view of this settlement, the LRs of Smt.K.C.Indira have no objection for dismissing the R.S.A.No.1208/2009 and decree the suit in O.S.No.270/1989 in favour of the Appellant/Puttathayamma herein.
4. The appellant & the LRs of the deceased respondents have hereby agreed to execute the sale deed in favour of the Appellant/ Smt.Puttathayamma herein within one month from this day, failing which, the said Puttathayamma can get the same executed by filing execution petition before court below.
5. The LR’s of the deceased respondent Smt.K C Indira assure that the schedule properties are free from any kind of encumbrances or lien or charge etc and that they have not encumbered or created third party rights in any manner. If any encumbrance of any nature is found by the appellant/Smt.Puttathayamma at any point of time, the LRs of the deceased respondent Smt.K.C.Indira shall be responsible to get it cleared in favour of the appellant/ Smt.Puttathayamma at their cost and indemnify and assure her of keeping the schedule properties free from any encumbrance of whatsoever nature to enable the payment of the balance amount as stated above. The LR’s of the deceased Respondent herewith agree that on their confirming that there is no encumbrance of whatsoever nature, they will receive the balance amount of Rs.6,00,000/- and execute the Sale deed with respect to the Schedule properties and duly get it registered in favour of the Appellant/Smt. Puttathayamma, within the agreed period.
6. The LR’s of respondent/Smt. K.C.Indira admits that the appellant/Smt.Puttathayamma is in peaceful possession & enjoyment of the suit schedule properties.
7. The parties specifically agree and confirm that Item No.1 of suit schedule property i.e., Survey No.122/B is now re-numbered as “122/2” (3A15g) and Item No.2 of suit schedule property i.e., Survey No.123/B- is now re-numbered as “123(3 Acre *18 guntas). This specific change is agreed by parties and have specifically agreed to incorporate the same in the sale deed.
8. In terms of above said compromise petition, the appellant and LRs of deceased Respondent prays that this Hon’ble court be pleased to record the Compromise Petition in the above case.
(a) Allow the appeal in RSA No.1232/2010 and consequently dismiss the suit in OS 321/1989 on the file of Addl Civil Judge, JR Dvn and JMFC, Madhugiri (b) Dismiss the appeal in RSA No.1208/2009 and consequently decree the suit filed by Smt. Puttathayamma for specific performance in OS 270/1989 on the file of Prl. Civil Judge, JR Dvn and JMFC, Madhugiri, in the interest of Justice.
*Corrected vide order dated 08.04.2019 on Being spoken to.
4. Compromise appears to be lawful. Hence, accepted. Appeals are disposed of in terms of the compromise petition.
Draw the decree in terms of the compromise petition.
Sd/- JUDGE tsn*