- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 2277 OF 2017 (PAR) BETWEEN: SRI. MAHADEVAIAH S/O LATE GANGANNNA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R.AT HESARAHALLI VILLAGE NITTUR HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 223. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B. RAMESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. CHANDRASHEKARACHAR S/O. LATE KRISHNACHAR AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS R/AT MARKET ROAD, CHIKPET ROAD CHIKPET, TUMKUR-572 101. REP. BY SPA HOLDER SRI. NARASIMHA SWAMY S/O. SRI. CHANDRASHEKARACHAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT MARKET ROAD, CHIKPET ROAD CHIKPET, TUMKUR-572 101. 2. SRI. NARAYANACHAR SINCE DEAD BY LRS Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 2(A) 2(B) 2(C) SMT. RAJAMMA W/O NARAYANACHAR MAJOR SRI. NARASIMHACHAR S/O LATE MARAYANACHAR MAJOR SRI. VENKATESHACHAR S/O LATE MARAYANACHAR MAJOR ALL ARE R/AT NITTUR GUBBI TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT-572 223. 3. 3(A) 3(B) 3(C) SRI. NARASIMHACHAR SINCE DEAD BY LRS SMT. LAKSHMI NARASAMMA W/O LATE NARASIMHACHAR AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, REP.BY SPA HOLDER B.N. HARISHACHAR, S/O. NARASIMHACHAR, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. SRI. YOGANARASIMHACHAR DEAD SMT. SHUBHA W/O LATE YOGANARASIMHACHAR MAJOR SRI. HARISHACHAR S/O LATE NARASIMHACHAR MAJOR ALL ARE R/AT KOLALA KORATAGERE TALUK TUMKURU-572 129. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 4. 4(A) SRI. SRIKANTACHAR SINCE DEAD BY LRS SMT. SARVAMANGALAMMA D/O LATE SRIKANTACHAR MAJOR R/AT ANUPANAHALLI DODDASAGGERE POST KORATAGERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 129. 5. 5(A) SRI. ASHWATHANARAYANACHAR SINCE DEAD BY LRS SMT. HEMAVATHI W/O LATE ASHWATHANARAYANACHAR MAJOR R/AT LAKSHMINARASIMHASWAMY NILAYA 8TH CROSS, NEAR LAWRENCE ENGLISH SCHOOL SIT EXTENSION, TUMKUR-572 102. 6. SRI. CHANDRACHAR S/O. LATE. SHAMACHAR AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT BEHIND JAIL KHANE VINOBHANAGAR TUMKUR-572 101. REP. BY SPA HOLDER 7. 7(A) 7(B) SRI. TYAGARAJACHAR SINCE DEAD BY LRS SRI. ANJAN KUMAR LATE TYAGARAJACHAR MAJOR R/AT NITTUR, GUBBI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 223. SMT. YAMUNAVATHI D/O LATE TYAGARAJACHAR - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 MAJOR R/AT LAKSHMIPURA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, BELAVATHA POST GUBBI TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572 219. 8. DR. KRISHNACHAR S/O. LATE. JAYARAMACHAR AGED 67 YEARS R/AT RAJARAJESHWARI CLINIC NITTUR, GUBBI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 216. REP. BY SPA HOLDER SRI. NARASIMHASWAMY S/O. SRI. CHANDRASHEKARACHAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT MARKET ROAD, CHIKPET ROAD CHIKPET, TUMKUR-572 101. 9. SRI. RAJAGOPALACHAR S/O. LATE. NARASIMHACHAR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT KOLALA VILLAGE EX. PANCHAYATHI MEMBER KORATAGERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 129. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. L.K. SRINIVASAMURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. CHETHAN .C, ADVOCATE FOR R2(A-C), R3(A-C), R4(A), R5(A) AND R7(A & B); SRI. M. NAGARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R6, R8 AND R9) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC. AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 09.08.2017 PASSED IN R.A.NO. 66/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMKUR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 03.01.2012 PASSED IN OS.NO.57/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, GUBBI. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT The appellant, Special Power of attorney holder of respondent No.1, respondents No.2a, 2b and 2c, respondents No.3a, 3b and 3c through special power of attorney holder and respondents No.5a, respondent No.6, respondents No.7a and 7b and special power of attorney holder of respondent No.8 are present before the Court. They are identified by their respective learned counsel. 2. The parties have filed a memorandum of compromise petition, which reads as follows: 1. The 1st respondent who has filed a suit bearing O.S.No.57/2007 seeking for relief of partition and separate possession by allotting his legitimate share of 1/8th in the suit schedule properties including suit item No.1 among other reliefs. It is submitted that, in - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 the said suit the 1st respondent herein had sought to declare that the registered sale deed dated 19.07.2000 executed in favour of defendant No.9/appellant herein in respect of the suit item No.1 by defendant No.1/respondent No.1 was null and void. 2. It is submitted that, the defendants No.1 & 2 after service of suit summon had filed written statement by admitting the relationship of 1st respondent herein and also admitted that defendant No.1 i.e. Narayanachar had sold the suit property in favor of defendant No.9 under a registered sale deed dated 19.07.2000 and also contended that the suit item No.1 was acquired by him an un-registered WILL executed by Narasimhachar in his favour and the said WILL was executed on 16.12.1979 and accordingly, he become the absolute owner of the said suit item No.1 and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the said suit. 3. It is submitted that, defendant No.4 to 6 had also filed their written statement and contended that they are also entitled for a legitimate share in the suit schedule property and also sought for allotment of their share in the suit schedule properties. 4. The appellant herein who was arrayed as defendant No.9 had also filed their written statement by adopting the written statement filed by defendant No.1 who was his vendor and also contended that he is in possession of the said property pursuant to the registered sale deed dated 19.07.2000 by getting his name mutated in the revenue records as per MR No.1/2000-2001 and also contended that he had invested huge sum of money in order to develop the said property and he had become the absolute owner of the property and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the said suit. 5. It is submitted that, the Learned Trial Judge after considering the oral and documentary evidence produced by the parties had proceeded to decree the suit filed by the plaintiff/respondent No.1 under its judgment and decree dated 03.01.2012 by holding the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 respondent No.1 was entitled for 1/9th share in the suit schedule properties and also held that the defendant No.4 to 6 are also entitled for 1/9th share each in the suit schedule property. 6. It is submitted that, both the defendant No.1 and defendant No.9 i.e. appellant herein being aggrieved against the said judgment and decree passed by Learned Trial Judge have preferred an appeal numbered as RA No.66/2012 on the file of 1st Additional District and Session Judge at Tumkur. It is submitted that, Lower Appellate Court after re- appreciating the oral and documentary evidence produced by the parties had proceeded to dismiss the appeal filed by Narayanachar and the appellant herein under its judgment and decree dated 09.08.2017 by confirming the order passed by the Learned Trial Judge in OS No.57/2007. 7. It is submitted that, the appellant who is arrayed as defendant No.9 before the Trial Court being aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the courts below had filed the accompanying appeal. It is submitted that, this Hon'ble court after considering the case put for the appellants had granted an interim order of stay of drawing of final decree proceedings under its order dated 18.08.2021. 8. It is submitted that, at the instant of well-wishers, family friends and relatives the dispute between the appellants and legal representative of Narayanachar had entered into a settlement by resolving the dispute amicably in respect of the suit item No.1 which has been purchased by the appellant herein under registered sale deed dated 19.07.2000 and have filed this compromise petition as per the following terms and conditions: i. The respondent including plaintiff / respondent No.1 herein and the legal representatives Narayanachar, the legal representative of Venkatachar, Shamachar and Krishnachar have agreed and declared that the sale - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 deed dated 19.07.2000 executed by deceased Narayanachar in favour of the appellant in respect of the suit item No.1 i.e. Sy No.27/2 measuring to an extent of 02 acres 15 guntas situated at Hesarahalli village, Nitur Hobli, Gubbi Taluk, Tumkur District is valid and the same is binding on all the legal representatives of Narayanchar. ii. The respondents who are the legal representatives of Narayanachar have declared that the appellant/defendant No.9 is absolute owner of the property bearing Sy No.27/2 measuring to an extent of 02 acres 15 guntas and none of their legal representatives or their family members do not have any nature of valid right, title or interest over the above stated property. iii. The respondents herein have agreed and declared that the appellant can enjoy suit item No.1 as per his whims and fancies and respondents would not have any nature of claim or rights over the property either by themselves and their family members in future. iv. The appellant in view of the settlement arrived between the parties had agreed to pay Rs.18,00,000/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs only) as full and final settlement/litigation expenses to the respondents in the following manner: a. A sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) is paid by way of Demand Draft bearing No.864811 drawn on State bank of India, Banasandra branch, Turuvekere Taluk in favor of Narasimhaswamy SPA Holder of 1st Respondent/plaintiff i.e., Chandrashekarachar. b. A sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) is paid by way of Demand Draft Bearing No.864805 drawn on State bank of India, Banasandra branch, Turuvekere Taluk in favor of Narasimhachar (Respondent No.2(b)) legal heirs of respondent No.1 - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 i.e., Late Narayanachar. The respondent No. 2(a) & (c) are accepted the same. c. A sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) is paid by way of Demand Draft bearing No.864814 drawn on State bank of India, Banasandra branch, Turuvekere Taluk in favor of smt. Shubha (Respondent No.3(b)) and sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) is paid by way of Demand Draft bearing No.864815 drawn on State bank of India, Banasandra branch, Turuvekere Taluk in favor of Harishachar B.N (Respondent No.3(c)) legal heirs No.3 of respondent i.e., Late Narasimhachar. The respondent No. 3(a) is accepted the same. d. A sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) is paid by way of Demand Draft bearing No.864813 drawn on State bank of India, Banasandra branch, Turuvekere Taluk in favor of Smt. Sarvamangala (Respondent No.4(a)) legal heirs of respondent No.4 i.e., Late Srikantachar. e. A sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) is paid by way of Demand Draft bearing No.864806 drawn on State bank of India, Banasandra branch, Turuvekere Taluk in favor of Smt. Hemavathi (Respondent No.5(a)) legal heirs of respondent No.5 i.e., Late Ashwathanarayanachar. f. A sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) is paid by way of Demand Draft bearing No.864808 drawn on State bank of India, Banasandra branch, Turuvekere Taluk in favor of Chandrachar i.e., Respondent No. 6. g. A sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) is paid by way of Demand Draft bearing No.864812 drawn on State bank of India, Banasandra branch, Turuvekere Taluk in favor of Anjan Kumar (Respondent No.9(a)) legal heirs of respondent No.7 i.e., Late Tyagarajachar. The respondent No. 7(b) accepted the same. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 h. A sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) is paid by way of Demand Draft bearing No.864809 drawn on State bank of India, Banasandra branch, Turuvekere Taluk in favor of Narasimhaswamy SPA Holder of 8th Respondent i.e., Dr. Krishnachar. i. A sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) is paid by way of Demand Draft bearing No.864810 drawn on State bank of India, Banasandra branch, Turuvekere Taluk in favor of Rajagopalachar i.e., 9th Respondent. v. The respondents have acknowledge the receipt of the above stated amount and declare that the said amount is towards the full and final settlement and the respondents have under took that they would not make any nature of claims in future. vi. The respondents have agreed and under taken that if any of the family members make any nature of claim in future by suppressing this compromise petition then the respondents herein have under taken to settle the dispute between the said family members without interfering suit item No.1 in future and respondent have agreed and under taken that they would not cause any nature of inconvenience or hardship to the appellant in future and they resolve the dispute if any and settle the same on their own without insisting anything from the appellant herein or claim any nature of additional amount. viii. The respondents have agreed and undertaken that they have no objection to continue the name of the appellant in the revenue records hereinafter. ix. The respondents have agreed that they have no objections to modify the judgment and decree passed by the courts below declaring that the appellant herein is absolute owner of the suit item No.1. x. Both the parties have agreed and undertaken that the above stated facts are have been explained to - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 them in the language known to them i.e. Kannada and after they understanding the contents and have affixed their signature on the compromise petition out of their free will and without any cohesion from any parties. WHEREFORE both the parties above named respectfully prays that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to modify the judgment and decree passed by the courts below in terms of this compromise petition and direct the office to draw the decree in terms of this compromise petition.” 3. The contents of the compromise petition is read over and explained to the parties in Kannada Language known to them. They have accepted the terms and conditions of the compromise petition and accordingly, prays to dispose of the appeal in terms of the compromise petition. 4. The compromise petition is taken on record. 5. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following ORDER (i) The appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise petition. (ii) Office is directed to draw decree in terms of the compromise petition. - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:11341 RSA No. 2277 of 2017 In view of the settlement between the parties, pending I.A.s do not survive for consideration. Accordingly, disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE BVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35