- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17678 RSA No. 924 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 924 OF 2019 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: SRI BHAVA NARAYANA SEVA SAMITHI REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY VENKATARAMAIAH ANEKAL TOWN, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-562 106 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. AKSHAY RAJ B.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI LAKSHMINARAYANAPPA G S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT SANTE BEEDI ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-562 106 2. THE CHIEF OFFICER MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ANEKAL BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU – 562 106 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIVEK B.N., ADVOCATE V/O DATED 25.04.2025 APPEAL DISMISSED AGAINST R2) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.01.2019 PASSED IN Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17678 RSA No. 924 of 2019 RA No.5021/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, ANEKAL, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.03.2016 PASSED IN OS No.170/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SR. CIVIL JUDGE, ANEKAL. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT The Secretary of the appellant – Samithi, and respondent No.1 are physically present before the Court. They are identified by their respective counsel. The appellant and respondent No.1 filed a compromise petition. The terms of the compromise petition reads as under: The present Appeal is filed challenging the Judgment and decree dated 31.01.2019 passed in R.A.No.5021/2016 on the file of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge at Anekal, Bengaluru urban District. 2. The Appellant herein is the Defendant No.2 in O.S.No. 170/2013. The Respondent No.1 is the Plaintiff who Instituted O.S.No. 170/2013 seeking declaration of title in respect of the Schedule - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17678 RSA No. 924 of 2019 Property; to execute registered Sale Deed and for other reliefs. The suit of the Plaintiff was dismissed by a Judgment and Decree dated 05.03.2016. Respondent No.1 herein preferred R.A.No.5021/2016 which was allowed by a Judgment and Decree dated 31.01.2019. It was declared that the Plaintiff is the absolute owner in possession of the suit property and Defendant No.2 (Appellant herein) was restrained by a Decree of Permanent Injunction from selling the suit property to any third parties. It is this Judgment and Decree that is passed by the III Additional District & Sessions Judge at Anekal which is under challenge in the present Appeal. 3. At the intervention of well-wishers and friends, the parties after detailed discussions, have resolved all their disputes and differences on the following terms and conditions: (a) The Respondent No.1 admits that the suit Schedule Property is allotted in favour of the Appellant by the Respondent No.2 Town Municipal Council. The Respondent No.1 affirms that the khata of the suit Schedule Property stands in the name of the Appellant Society. The Respondent No.1 further affirms and confirms that the Appellant Society shall be entitled to deal with and utilise the suit Schedule Property for their activities. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17678 RSA No. 924 of 2019 (b) The Appellant is reimbursing the expenses incurred by the Respondent No.1 for fighting the litigation and to enable Respondent No.1 to invest in an alternative property. Accordingly, in view of the confirmation made by the Respondent No.1 in relation to the suit Schedule Property having been allotted in favour of the Appellant Sangha and further having affirmed that they can utilise it for their activities and that Respondent No.1 and his family members do not have any manner of right, title or interest over the suit Schedule Property, the Appellant as on this day paid a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- (NINE lakhs) to Respondent No.1 by a Demand Draft bearing No.006338, dated: 07.04.2025, drawn on IDBI Bank, Anekal Branch, in favour of the Respondent No.1, the receipt of which is admitted by Respondent No.1 before this Court. (c) The Respondent No.1 further submits that the Appellant Society is free to deal with the suit Schedule Property in any manner it deems fit without reference to Respondent No.1. The Respondent No.1 Plaintiff further submits that he has no claim of any nature whatsoever in respect of the suit Schedule Property. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17678 RSA No. 924 of 2019 (d) The Respondent No.1 was in lawful possession over the Suit Schedule Property from respondent No.2, and then appellant put in physical possession & enjoyment over the suit schedule property since from 1979, accordingly katha in respect of suit schedule property continuously stands in the name of appellant. The Respondent No.1 confirms having physical, lawful possession of the suit Schedule Property in favour of the Appellant, on this day in view of the present compromise between the parties. The Appellant Society in view of the present compromise is become absolute owner, in continuous possession and enjoyment of the suit Schedule Property and is entitled to get the e-khata in respect of the suit Schedule Property made out in its name and pay taxes to Respondent No.2 Town Municipal Council. 4. The parties have entered into the present Compromise Petition out of their own, free will and choice without there being any compulsion, pressure or coercion. Sri. Venkataramaiah is authorized and empowered to sign the present Compromise Petition as Secretary of the Appellant Society. 5. The Respondent No. 1 shall handover document with respect to allotment made in his favour and the Respondent No. 1 has no objections for the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:17678 RSA No. 924 of 2019 Appellant to approach the authorities to seek necessary deeds and documents in his favour pursuant to payment made by the Appellant confirming allotment in his favour in respect of Schedule Properties. Respondent No. 1 hereby confirms that the Appellant in is possession ever since the payment made by Appellant to Respondent No. 2. 6. In light of the present Compromise Petition, neither parties have any claim of whatsoever nature against each other and the Appellant herein is the owner in possession and enjoyment of the suit Schedule Property. 7. The parties shall bear their own costs in the present proceedings. WHERFORE, the parties pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to accept the present Compromise Petition filed by the parties and decree the suit of the Plaintiff in terms of this compromise, in the interest of justice and equity. SCHEDULE PROPERTY Item No.1: All that piece and parcel of the site property bearing Site No.7, formed at Gangadareshwara - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:17678 RSA No. 924 of 2019 Temple, Anekal, Anekal Town, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore Urban District and bounded on the: East by: Municipality Road, West by: Raja Khaluve, North by: Acchappa's site No.8, South by: Property of Srinivas. Item No.2: All that piece and parcel of the site property bearing Site No.5, formed at Gangadareshwara Temple, Anekal, Anekal Town, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore Urban District and bounded on the: East by: Site of Anjanappa, West by: Municipality Road, North by : Site No.4 belonging to Sri. Venkiatappa and South by: Site No.6 belong to Sri. Venkataswamappa. Item No.3: All that piece and parcel of the site property bearing Site No.3, formed at Gangadareshwara Temple, Anekal, Anekal Town, Anekal taluk, Bangalore Urban District and bounded on the: East by : Road and Gangadareshwara Temple, West by: Site No.6 belonging to Sri. Venkataswamppa, North by : Site No.2 belonging to Sri. Anjanappa, and South by: Property of Srinivas. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:17678 RSA No. 924 of 2019 2. The contents of the compromise petition is read over to the parties in the language known to them. They have understood, and accepted the terms and conditions of the compromise petition, and accordingly, prays to dispose of the appeal in terms of the compromise. 3. The compromise petition is placed on record. 4. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise petition. 5. The Office is directed to draw a decree in terms of compromise petition accordingly. In view of the disposal of the appeal, I.A.No.1/2019, does not survive for consideration, and is accordingly, disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SKS