- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15582-DB RFA No. 624 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 624 OF 2011 (SP) BETWEEN: SMT. B PARVATHAMMA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS W/O M. KRISHNAPPA R/O GURAPPANAMATA VIJAYAPURA TOWN DEVANAHALLI TOWN BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562110 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. G V SHASHIKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. S JAYARAM AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS S/O LATE PATEL SHETTAPPA R/O TIPPU SULTAN ROAD DEVANAHALLI TOWN BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562110 2. SMT BHAVANI AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS D/O M. KRISHNAPPA W/O CHANDRASHEKAR R/AT BIJJAVARA VILLAGE VIJAYAPURA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562110 Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15582-DB RFA No. 624 of 2011 3. SRI. GOPI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS S/O M. KRISHNAPPA 4. SRI. PRABHAKARA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS S/O M. KRISHNAPPA BOTH ARE R/O GURAPPANAMATA VIJAYAPURA TOWN DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562110 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V ANAND FOR R1, ADVOCATE FOR R1(PH) SRI. G.S. PATIL ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4) V/O DATED 15.04.2025 APPEAL AGAINST R2 TO R4 IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41, RULE 1 R/W SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.12.2010 PASSED IN O.S.1569/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DEVANAHALLI, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL CAV JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL) Present appeal is filed by the appellant who was defendant No.1 in O.S.No.1569/2006 which was filed by respondent No.1/plaintiff for the relief of specific performance - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15582-DB RFA No. 624 of 2011 of agreement to sell dated 05.11.2005, which was decreed by Judgment and decree dated 15.12.2010 directing appellant/defendant No.1 to execute the deed of sale conveying the property in favour of respondent No.1/plaintiff within three months by receiving balance sale consideration. 2. Today a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC is filed by the counsel for the appellant/defendant No.1 and counsel for the respondent No.1/plaintiff in the personal presence of the appellant/defendant No.1 and respondent No.1/plaintiff. The terms of the compromise petition read as under: COMPROMISE PETITION UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 3 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 "The Appellant and the Respondent No.1 submit as follows:- 1. The Respondent No.1/Plaintiff filed a suit in O.S. No.1569/2006 before the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Devanahalli, for the relief of specific performance of the Agreement of sale dated 05/11/2005 and such other reliefs in respect of the agricultural land bearing Sy.No.159/16 new No.159/P-14 measuring 2.00 acres, situated at Vijayapura village and Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, against the defendant No.1/appellant and defendants 2 to 4/Respondents 2 to 4 herein. 2. The Respondent No.1/plaintiff in the said suit had contended that the aforesaid land was acquired - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15582-DB RFA No. 624 of 2011 by the defendant No.1/Appellant herein under a sale deed dated 09/11/1990 from one Sri. M. Narayanaswamy and Lakshminarayana and in pursuance of the same, the said land is mutated in the name of the defendant No.1/Appellant and that she is the absolute owner. That the defendants had agreed to sell the aforesaid property for valuable sale consideration of Rs.11,60,000/- per acre and accordingly the agreement of sale was executed by on receipt of Rs.10,00,000/-. 3. The appellant/first Defendant has filed her written statement contending that the suit schedule property is the joint family property of herself and her children and that she does not have exclusive right, title, interest and possession over the suit schedule property and also denied the alleged readiness and willingness of the first Respondent/Plaintiff and contended that all the co- owners have not the signatories to the alleged agreement of sale dated 05/11/2005 even though their names are mentioned in the agreement of sale and that she would refund the amount received and the defendants 3 and 4 had filed written statement supporting the defendant No.1. 4. 4. The suit came to be decreed as per judgment and decree dated 15/12/2010 by opining that the suit schedule property is the self-acquired property of defendant No.1/appellant herein and directed the defendant No.1/appellant herein to execute the sale deed in terms of the suit agreement in favour of the plaintiff/respondent No.1 in respect of the suit property. 5. The present appeal is filed by Defendant No. 1/Appellant herein challenging the judgement of decree dated 15/12/2010 in O.S.No.1569/2006, passed by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Devanahalli. 6. At the intervention of well-wishers, mediators, friends of the appellant and the Respondent No.1 herein and they had decided to settle the dispute in - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15582-DB RFA No. 624 of 2011 the following manner which is detailed below, requesting this Hon'ble Court to record the same and pass appropriate orders. 7. The Plaintiff/Respondent No.1, has agreed to receive a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs Only) from the Defendant No.1/Appellant herein towards full and final settlement of all his claims, in lieu of specific performance, in terms of the Agreement of Sale dated 05/11/2005. 8. The plaintiff/Respondent No.1 has no objection for allowing the present appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree dated 15/12/2010 in O.S.No.1569/2006, passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli and dismiss the suit as settled in terms of the present compromise petition. 9. The Plaintiff/Respondent No.1 declares that he has not done any act or deeds or things which will prejudice the right of the appellant herein in the suit schedule property. In case of any claims by parties claiming under the Plaintiff/Respondent No.1, the Respondent No.1 herein agrees to answer the same and undertakes to indemnify and keep indemnified the appellant from such claims and demands. 10. The appellant has paid the aforesaid sum of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs Only) to the Respondent No.1 in the following manner; a) A sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only) by way of Demand Draft bearing No.031725, drawn on Karnataka Bank Ltd., Vijayapura Branch, in the name of Patel S. Jayaram, dated 08/04/2025. b) A sum of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Only) by way of Demand Draft bearing No.031727, drawn on Karnataka Bank Ltd., Vijayapura Branch, in the name of Patel S. Jayaram, dated 09/04/2025. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15582-DB RFA No. 624 of 2011 c) A sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only) by way of Demand Draft bearing No.494537, drawn on Canara Bank Ltd., Avathi Branch, in the name of Patel S. Jayaram, dated 11/04/2025. d) A sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) by way of Demand Draft bearing No.522186, drawn on ICICI Bank, Sahakara Nagar Branch, in the name of Patel S. Jayaram, dated 11/04/2025. The Respondent No.1 herein acknowledges the receipt of the aforesaid amount/demand drafts and confirms the receipt of the same towards full and final settlement of all his claims. 11. The above compromise is entered into by parties with their, free will and volition and the same is without any threat, coercion or undue influence and further the parties agree that the terms of compromise are fair, just, equitable, correct and as a full and final settlement. Wherefore the appellants and the Respondent No.1 pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to record the compromise and allow the appeal by setting aside the judgment and decree dated 15/12/2010 in O.S.No.1569/2006, passed by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Devanahalli and dismiss the suit as settled and further order for refund of the court fee paid by the appellant, in the interest of justice and equity". 3. In terms of paragraph 10 of the aforesaid compromise, the appellant/defendant No.1 has handed over four demand drafts as detailed thereunder. Same are received by the respondent No.1/plaintiff. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:15582-DB RFA No. 624 of 2011 4. Since the parties have understood the terms of compromise and have expressed their satisfaction and terms of the compromise not being contrary to provisions of law and agreement being lawful, same is accepted. Appeal is allowed. Impugned Judgment and decree dated 15.12.2010 in O.S.No.1569/2006 passed by the trial Court is hereby set aside. O.S.No.1569/2006 is decreed in terms of compromise petition. Draw decree accordingly. Registry is directed to refund the permissible court fee to the appellant on proper identification. Sd/- (K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE SBN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51