IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.918/2018 (INJ) BETWEEN:
SRI MURALIDHAR K S/O SRI KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 26, 7TH MAIN, 19TH ‘D’ CROSS, N S PALYA, BTM 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU – 560076. …APPELLANT (BY SRI.S.B.LAKSHMI, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI P C GOPAL REDDY S/O CHIKKAMUNISWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/O NO.636, 28TH MAIN, BTM LAYOUT, II STAGE, I PHASE, BENGALURU – 560076.
2. SRI GAJENDRA REDDY S/O GUNDA REDDY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/O NO 30, KOODLU VILLAGE BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU - 560068 3. SRI P C MALLAREDDY S/O CHIKKAMUNISWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS R/AT NO 336, PARAPPANA AGRAHARA ELECTRONIC CITY POST, BENGALURU - 560100 4. SRI SRIPAL SRINIVASALU FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE APPELLANT MAJOR BY AGE PROP:SRINIVASA DEVELOPERS NO.110/2, ARALUR MAIN ROAD SARJAPUR ROAD, BENGALURU – 560102.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M.V.CHANDRASHEKARA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC,1908 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 8.2.2018 PASSED IN OS NO.4547/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXIX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION THIS RFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDERS ON COMPROMISE PETITION Learned counsel for the appellant files a memo stating that the appellant does not press this appeal against respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3. Memo is placed on record and appeal against respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 is dismissed.
2. The appellant and the 4th respondent are present with their respective Advocates and they submit a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The contents of the compromise petition are read over and explained to the parties in Kannada language. They submit that they are aware of the compromise petition and confirm the correctness of the same. They also submit that they have voluntarily signed this compromise petition.
3. On going through the compromise petition, it is found that the appellant is conceding the right, title and interest of respondent No.4 in respect of suit property and he has received Rs.13,00,000/-from respondent No.4. Since the terms of the compromise are lawful, it is accepted.
Draw decree accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE PYR