Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri K T Seshagiri vs Smt B S Mala W/O

High Court Of Karnataka|21 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR R.F.A.NO.184 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
Sri K.T.Seshagiri S/o Sri K.Thimme Gowda Aged about 52 years R/at No.100, Nanjappa Block Kempegowda Nagar (Gavipura Guttahalli) Bengaluru – 560 019 …Appellant (By Sri Nagendra Kumar, Advocate) AND:
Smt. B.S.Mala W/o Sri B.S.Puttaraju Aged about 49 years R/at No.13, 60 feet Road Sangolli Rayanna Road Amarjyothi Nagar Bengaluru – 560 040 ... Respondent (By Sri S.Kalyan Basavaraj, Advocate) This RFA is filed under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 25.11.2015 passed in O.S.No.15962/2004 on the file of the XIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayohall Unit, Bengaluru, decreeing the suit for permanent injunction.
This appeal coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Parties to the appeal present a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC. The appellant Sri K.T.Seshagiri, is present before the Court. The respondent-Smt. B.S.Mala is represented by her power of attorney holder, Sri Channappa, who is present before the Court. Power of Attorney is also produced. Power of Attorney is executed by the respondent to enable the power of attorney holder to enter into compromise. The appellant and the power of attorney holder of the respondent have signed the compromise petition; their advocates have also signed the compromise petition. The terms of the compromise are read over and explained to the appellant and the power of attorney holder of the respondent in Kannada. They admit the contents to be true and they also submit that they have entered into this compromise voluntarily. The appellant also acknowledges receipt of Rs.15,28,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand only) paid to him by the respondent. Having received this amount, the appellant concedes the ownership and possession of the suit property. The terms of the compromise are lawful, therefore compromise is accepted. Appeal stands disposed off.
Draw decree accordingly.
Send back the LCR to enable the parties to take back the documents produced by them.
SD/- JUDGE KMV/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri K T Seshagiri vs Smt B S Mala W/O

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
21 February, 2019
Judges
  • Sreenivas Harish Kumar