IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.1906 OF 2008 BETWEEN Sri. Doddananjappa @ Kumar, Aged about 36 years, S/o. Sri. Channananjaiah, R/at Honnadevihalli Village, Bindiganavile Hobli, Nagamangala Taluk, Mandya District-571415 (By Sri. Y.V.Prakash, Advocate) AND 1. Sinddalingappa S/o. Nanjappa, (Since deceased by LRs) 1(a) Smt. Ranamma @ Rani, Aged about 53 years, W/o. Late Siddalingappa, 1(b) Sri. H.S.Manjunath Aged about 34 years, S/o. Late Siddalingegowda, 1(c) Sri. H.S.Basavaraju @ Chinnu Aged about 19 years, S/o. Late Siddalingegowda, …Appellant All are residing at Honnadevihalli Village, Bindiganavile Hobli, Nagamangala Taluk, Mandya District (By Sri. P.S.Jamadagni, Advocate for R1(a-c)) …Respondents This RSA is filed under Section 100 of CPC against the judgment & decree dated 16.07.2008 passed in R.A.No.16/08 on the file of the Civil Judge, (Sr.Dn.) & JMFC, Nagamangala, allowing the appeal and setting aside against the judgment and decree dated 19.12.2007 passed in O.S.No.56/05 on the file of the Civil Judge, (Jr.Dn) & JMFC.
This RSA coming on for orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER A joint memo has been filed by the appellant and the respondents. This memo is singed by the learned counsel for the appellant and also the respondents. In the memo it is stated that the appellant herein filed a suit O.S.No.8/2012 on the file of the Court of Civil Judge, (Sr. Dv.), Nagamangala against the respondent and others and in the said suit a compromise was reported on 20.02.2012. In view of this compromise, it is prayed that the judgments in O.S.56/2005 and RA.16/2008 are to be modified and this appeal should be allowed. Certified copy of the compromise is also produced along with this memo. In Para 9 of the compromise petition, it is stated that the defendants 1 to 5 do not have any kind of right or interest in respect of 47.5 guntas of land in Sy.No.3. Respondents 1(a to c) in this appeal are said to be defendants 1 to 3 in the said suit. In view of this compromise, this appeal does not survive. But as stated in the memo this appeal cannot be allowed. The terms of the compromise in O.S.No.8/2012 bind the parties. Therefore this appeal is accordingly disposed of.
SD/- JUDGE sd