IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY R.F.A.No.1914 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
Sri. Dilip Kumar K. S/o. Sri. Kanakmull Aged about 31 years, R/at No.21, NR Road Bengaluru – 560 002.
(By Sri. R.B. Sadasivappa, Advocate) AND:
Smt. Zamila M.B.
W/o. Sri Shaikh Mustafa Aged about 56 years R/at No.5/4, Church Road Off: Ranoji Rao Road, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru – 560 004.
(By Sri. Ramesh Ananthan, Advocate) **** …Appellant …Respondent This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the judgment and decree dated:10-06-2019 passed in O.S.No.1776/2016 on the file of the LX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, (CCH-61), partly decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for ejectment.
This Regular First Appeal coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R This is a defendant’s appeal against the judgment and decree dated 10-06-2019 passed in O.S.No.1776/2016 in the Court of the LX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, (CCH-61), (hereinafter for brevity referred to as “Trial Court”) wherein on the suit filed by the present respondent, the Trial Court has ordered and directed the defendant to vacate and handover the vacant possession of the suit property, within three months from the date of the order, failing which plaintiff is entitled to recover the vacant possession of suit schedule property from the defendant, with due process of law.
2. Both parties are contesting this matter.
However, during the pendency of this appeal, both side parties have come up with some understanding and settlement and have filed a compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 today.
3. The terms of the compromise are reproduced herein below:-
1. In view of settlement the parties admit the correctness and legality of impugned judgment and decree.
2. The appellant/tenant agrees to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the suit schedule premises to the respondent on or before the expiry of 31-10-2020 and further agrees to pay the monthly rent at Rs.50,000/- to the respondent regularly.
3. The respondent/landlady admits that the appellant has paid the rents up-to- date to her daughter Smt. Rashida and the respondent accepts the same.
4. The respondent/ landlady undertakes to refund the advance amount of Rs.32,00,000/- to the appellant by way of DD or RTGS on the day the appellant/respondent vacates and delivers vacant possession of the suit schedule premises to the respondent.
5. The appellant/tenant further agrees to pay Rs.1,00,000/- per month in the event of seeking any extension of time for a short period for vacating and delivering the vacant possession of the schedule premises to the respondent after the expiry on 31-10-2020.
6. The parties pray that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to modify the impugned decree in terms of the compromise petition, in the interest of justice and equity.
7. The respondent further admits that she has no claim for arrears of rent/damages for the schedule premises.
In view of the settlement between the parties the appellant above named prays that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to order for refund of the court fee as per rules, in the interest of justice and equity.”
4. Both side parties are present in person and are identified by their respective counsels. Both parties were enquired by this Court and it was noticed that both parties have entered into this compromise out of their own volition, free consent and keeping their best interest under consideration.
5. Learned counsels from both side also make their submissions in support of the compromise petition and further submit that the parties out of their own will and volition voluntarily have entered into a compromise keeping their best interest under consideration.
6. A perusal of the compromise petition shows that the same is in accordance with law, as such, the compromise petition may be taken on record and accepted and also the appeal can be disposed of on the terms of the compromise petition.
7. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of on the terms of the compromise petition which are reproduced hereinabove from point Nos. 1 to 5 and point No.7. By virtue of point No.6 in the compromise petition, the appeal is being disposed of.
8. With the above observation, the compromise petition stands allowed and the appeal stands disposed of by modifying the impugned judgment and decree of the Trial Court dated 10-06-2019 passed in O.S.No.1776/2016 on the terms of the above said compromise petition as per the compromise terms at Sl.Nos.1 to 5 and Sl.No.7.
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*