IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 08th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR W.P.NO. 17569/2017 C/W W.P.NO. 17568/2017 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
SRI. B. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE RAMAKKA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT NO.39, 5TH CROSS 7TH MAIN, L.N. PURA BANGALORE-560 021.
... COMMON PETITIONER (BY SRI.PRITHVI WODEYAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, 3RD FLOOR VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWER VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001.
2. DEFENCE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION, CAMBRIDGE ROAD OPP. TO C.M.S. OFFICE AGRAM POST BANGALORE-560 007 REP. BY DEFENCE ESTATE MANAGER ESTATE MANAGEMENT UNIT, DRDO.
3. MR. MUNIYAPPA S/O LATE BYATAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/AT KATTUGOLLAHALLI VILLAGE BIDARAHALLI HOBLI BANGALORE EAST TALUK-560 125.
... COMMON RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.UMESH MURTHY, HCGP FOR R-1;
SRI. KRISHNA. S. DIXIT, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; SRI. R. ABDUL RIYAZ, ADVOCATE FOR R-3) W.P.NO. 17568/2017 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.03.2016 IN EX.PET NO.2116/2009 BY THE COURT OF II ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DISMISSING THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER ORDER 21 RULE -97 OF CPC AT ANNEXURE-J.
W.P.NO. 17569/2017 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY, STAYING THE OPERATION AND EXECUTION OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT DATED 16.01.2017 PASSED IN W.P.NO.17014/2014 AT ANNEXURE-K.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.
Perused the records.
2. Petitioner who is the applicant/objector in Execution Petition No.2116/2009 is assailing the order dated 14.03.2016 passed in said execution proceedings by the learned II Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru dismissing the application filed by petitioner under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC – Annexure-J.
3. Land bearing Sy.No.64/11 measuring 2 acres situated at Kattagollahalli village came to be acquired by first respondent for the benefit of second respondent and compensation of Rs.60,000/- per acre came to be awarded. On reference being made in LAC No.219/1999, reference Court awarded a sum of Rs.3,45,000/- per acre and this Court in MFA No.2585/2004 c/w MFA Crob.No. 392/2017 dismissed the appeal filed by first respondent herein and allowed cross objections filed by third respondent herein by enhancing the compensation to Rs.8,40,000/- per acre. Third respondent in order to enjoy the fruits of the award, filed execution petition No.2116/2009 before City Civil Judge, Bengaluru. In the said proceedings, petitioner herein filed an application as objector contending interalia that he is the owner of property and he had already approached Civil Court in O.S.No.
2/2012 with a prayer for declaration to declare that he is entitled to receive compensation and said suit had been decreed on 03.04.2012. In order to enjoy fruits of the decree so obtained by him, he filed Execution Petition No.78/2012. In the meanwhile, beneficiary of the land acquired had deposited the award amount in Execution Petition No.2116/2009 which had been filed by third respondent herein. However, beneficiary had filed an application in Execution Petition No.2116/2009 to transfer the amount which had been deposited by it to Execution No.78/2012 and said application came to be allowed by order dated 14.03.2016.
4. Writ petitioner filed an application under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC in Execution Petition No.2116/2009 as Objector with a prayer to transfer the deposited amount by judgment debtor (second respondent herein) and to hold a detailed enquiry into the question of right over the property by virtue of judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.2/2012. Said application came to be resisted by third respondent herein and executing Court by impugned order dated 14.03.2016 dismissed the application and being aggrieved by the same, third respondent (Sri. Muniyappa) filed W.P.No.17014/2016 in which proceedings, petitioner herein had not been impleaded as a party. This Court by order dated 16.01.2017 – Annexure-L allowed the writ petition by quashing the order of executing Court and directed the reference Court to deposit the amount in any interest bearing fixed deposit for a period of one year, during the pendency of Misc. Petition No.34/2015 filed by third respondent herein whereunder he had sought for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 03.04.2012 passed in O.S.NO.2/2012. Seeking recall/ review of order dated 16.01.2017 passed in W.P.No.17014/2014- Annexure-K, W.P.No.17569/2017 is filed. Whereas, W.P.No.17568/2017 is filed for setting aside the order dated 14.03.2016 -Annexure-J, whereunder executing Court has dismissed the application filed by the writ petitioner under Order 21 Rule 97 of CPC.
5. When the matter came to be listed on 07.12.2017, petitioner and respondent filed a compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC. This Court by order of even date has directed that both parties should appear on 08.12.2017 before the Registrar (Computers) who was requested to record the compromise and file a report. Pursuant to same, report came to be filed by the Registrar (Computers) and it is stated that terms of the compromise was explained to third respondent who is aged more than 80 years and consent of his son was also obtained and both of them were explained about terms of the compromise and they have agreed to and consented to make payment of Rs.14 lakhs in favour of the petitioner from out of award amount. Said report would also disclose that proceedings have been video graphed and photographs reflecting presence of the parties and their learned Advocates is also appended to the said report. Registrar (Computers) in order to satisfy himself about identity of the parties is also said to have interacted with them and having perused proof of their identity produced namely, Aadhar card is to have verified the same. It is further indicated in the report that terms of the compromise petition have been accepted by the parties without any force or coercion. In that view of the matter, this Court finds that there is no impediment to accept the report. Accordingly, report of Registrar (Computers) recording the compromise between petitioner and third respondent is hereby accepted.
6. Learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent-1 submits that dispute in question is inter se between petitioner and third respondent and as such, he has no objection for accepting the compromise petition. Second respondent is served and represented by a counsel and second respondent cannot object to this arrangement entered into between petitioner and third respondent.
7. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (1) Writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the compromise petition and in substitution to the impugned order, it is hereby ordered that out of the compensation amount deposited by second respondent herein which is now in fixed deposit, shall be called for by the Executing Court adjudicating Execution Petition No.2116/2009 forthwith and it shall disburse the amount with accrued interest in the following manner:
(i) A cheque shall be issued in the name of petitioner for a sum of Rs.14 lakhs by the Registry of the Executing Court on proper identification of petitioner (Sri. B. Krishnappa).
(ii) Balance award amount (now in Fixed deposit) with entire accrued interest shall be disbursed by the Executing Court in favour of third respondent (Sri.
Muniyappa) by issuing a cheque in his name forthwith on proper identification.
(iii) Cheques shall be issued by the Executing Court forthwith, at any rate, within 15 days from the date amount is received from the Bank.
(iv) It is made clear that in the event of Executing Court were to order for payment of any additional compensation and directing second respondent – beneficiary to deposit said amount, same shall be disbursed between petitioner and third respondent equally on such deposit being made by second respondent.
*sp SD/- JUDGE