- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 125 OF 2013 CONNECTED WITH REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 896 OF 2017 (PAR) IN RFA No. 125/2013 BETWEEN: 1. SRI SIDDEGOWDA AGED 50 YEARS S/O LATE SANNEGOWDA. 2. SRI. NAGARAJU AGED 48 YEARS S/O LATE SANNEGOWDA BOTH ARE R/AT NO. 396 KOORGALLI, BELAADI POST ILAWALA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK MYSORE DIST-570 018. 3. SMT. KAMALAMMA AGED 42 YEARS D/O LATE SANNEGOWDA W/O SANNAHYDEGOWDA HULIKERE VILLAGE SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK MANDYA DIST-571 426. 4. SMT. JAYAMMA AGED 36 YEARS D/O LATE SANNEGOWDA Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 W/O SRINIVASAA HULIKERE VILLAGE SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK MANDYA DIST-571 426. 5. SMT. SHAKUNTHALA AGED 34 YEARS D/O LATE SANNEGOWDA W/O SHIVANNA MANUGANAHALLY VILLAGE BILIKERE HOBLI MYSORE TALUK-571 103. 6. SMT. GAYATHRI AGED 31 YEARS D/O LATE SANNEGOWDA W/O MAHADEVA SINCE DECEASED REP. BY HER LRs’ 6(a) SRI MAHADEVA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O SRI KARIGOWDA 6(b) SRI DILIP AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS S/O SRI MAHADEVA & SMT. GAYATHRI 6(c) SMT. PUNITHA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS W/O SRI. ASHOKA D/O SRI. MAHADEVA AND LATE GAYATHRI NO.6(a) TO 6(c) ARE R/AT BELAWADI VILLAGE HAWALA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK AND DISTRTICT-570018. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 7. SMT. BORAMMA AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS W/O LATE SANNEGOWDA KOORGALLI VILLAGE MYSORE TALUK-570018. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. Y V PRAKASH AND SRI Y K NARAYANA SHARMA - ADVOCATES) AND: 1. SMT YASHODHAMMA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS W/O LATE PAPANNA 2. SMT. SUDHAMANI AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS D/O LATE PAPANNA W/O PUTTASWAMY 3. SRI. MANJU AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS S/O LATE PAPANNA 4. SRI. SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O DEVARASEGOWDA SINCE DECEASED REP. BY HIS LRs’ 4(a) SMT. SUSHEELAMMA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS W/O LATE SHIVANNA 4(b) SRI. ANIL KUMAR S AGED ABOUT 32 YEAS D/O LATE SHIVANNA 4(c) SMT. RAKSHITHA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS D/O LATE SHIVANNA - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 THE RESPONDENTS NO.4(a) TO 4(c) ARE R/AT MANUGANAHALLI BILIKERE HOBLI HUNSUR TALUK, MYSURU – 571103. 5. SRI. KRISHNA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS S/O DEVARASEGOWDA 6. SMT. MADAMMA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS D/O DEVARASEGOWDA W/O MUDDALINGAPPA, BELAGOLA SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK-571 606. 7. SMT. PADMA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS D/O DEVARASEGOWDA MANNAGANAHALLI VILLAGE BELIKERE TALUK-571 103. 8. SRI. M MAHADEVU AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O MADAPPA, KOORGAHALLI MYSORE TALUK-570 018. 9. SMT. CHIKKATHAYAMMA AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS W/O DODDARASEGOWDA KOORGAHALLI, MYSORE TALUK-570 018. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VINAY – ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MANMOHAN P N – ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 3, 5 TO 7 & 9 & 4(a) TO (c); RESPONDENT NO.8 SERVED AND UNRERPESENTED; VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 25.05.2021, REQUIREMENT OF SUBSTITUTION OF LRs’ OF DECEASED RESPONDENT NO.9 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS RFA FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER XLI AND RULE -1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 AND DECREE DATED 14.12.2012 PASSED IN O.S.917/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE IV-ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MYSORE. IN RFA NO. 896/2017 BETWEEN 1. SMT. BORAMMA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS W/O LATE SANNEGOWDA KOORGALLI VILLAGE MYSORE TALUK-570018. 2. SRI SIDDEGOWDA AGED 58 YEARS S/O LATE SANNEGOWDA. 3. SRI. NAGARAJU AGED 54 YEARS S/O LATE SANNEGOWDA ALL ARE R/AT NO. 396 KOORGALLI, BELAADI POST ILAWALA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK MYSORE DIST-570 018. 4. SMT. KAMALAMMA AGED 51 YEARS D/O LATE SANNEGOWDA W/O SANNAHYDEGOWDA HULIKERE VILLAGE SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK MANDYA DIST-571 426. 5. SMT. JAYAMMA AGED 49 YEARS D/O LATE SANNEGOWDA W/O SRINIVASAA HULIKERE VILLAGE SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK MANDYA DIST-571 426. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 6. SMT. SHAKUNTHALA AGED 47 YEARS D/O LATE SANNEGOWDA W/O SHIVANNA MANUGANAHALLY VILLAGE BILIKERE HOBLI MYSORE TALUK-571 103. 7. SMT. R. GAYATHRI AGED 45 YEARS D/O LATE SANNEGOWDA W/O MAHADEVA SINCE DECEASED REP. BY HER LRs’ 7(a) SRI MAHADEVA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O SRI KARIGOWDA 7(b) SRI DILIP KUMAR M AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS S/O SRI MAHADEVA & SMT. GAYATHRI 7(c) SMT. PUNITHA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS W/O SRI. ASHOKA D/O SRI. MAHADEVA AND LATE GAYATHRI PROPOSED APPELLANTS NO.7(a) TO 7(c) ARE R/AT BELAWADI VILLAGE HAWALA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK AND DISTRTICT-570018. …APPELLANTS - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 AND: 1. SMT. CHIKKATHAYAMMA AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS W/O DODDARASEGOWDA KOORGAHALLI MYSORE TALUK-570 018. 2. SMT YASHODHAMMA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS W/O LATE PAPANNA 3. SMT. SUDHAMANI AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS D/O LATE PAPANNA W/O PUTTASWAMY 4. SRI. MANJU AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS S/O LATE PAPANNA 5. SRI. SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O DEVARASEGOWDA 6. SRI. KRISHNA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS S/O DEVARASEGOWDA ALL ARE R/AT KOORGALLI VILLAGE MYSURU TALUK – 570 018. 7. SMT. MADAMMA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS D/O DEVARASEGOWDA W/O MUDDALINGAPPA R/AT BELAGOLA SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT -571 426. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 8. SMT. PADMA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS D/O DEVARASEGOWDA R/AT MANNAGANAHALLI VILLAGE BELIKERE HOBLI HUNSUR TALUK-571 103. 9. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD ZONAL OFFICE METAGALLY, MYSURU REPRESENTED BY THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VINAY – ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MANMOHAN P N – ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 4, 6 & 8, RESPONDENTS NO.5 & 7 SERVED AND UNRERPESENTED; VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 25.05.2021, REQUIREMENT OF SUBSTITUTION OF LRs’ OF DECEASED RESPONDENT NO.1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS RFA FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER XLI AND RULE -1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 21.02.2017 PASSED IN O.S.543/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE II-ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MYSORE. THESE RFAs, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR) Learned counsels Sri Y.V Prakash and Y.K.Narayana Sharma for appellants are present. Learned counsel Sri Vinay appears for learned counsel Sri Manmohan.P.N who is on record for respective respondents. 2. Learned counsel for appellants and respondents have filed a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 1 of the CPC. The same reads as under : The parties in the above appeal respectfully submit that at the intervention of the well wishers and friends, the parties have settled the disputes between them amicably and they have agreed to the following terms: 1. The land bearing Sy.No.99/1 totally measuring 2 acres 15 guntas equally share as 1 Acre 7 ½ guntas on the Southern side to the appellants and 1 Acre 7 ½ guntas on the Northern side to the respondents no.1 to 7 jointly. The land measuring 1 Acre 7 ½ guntas allotted to Respondents No.1 to 7 has been shown in sketch as “G”. Out of the 1 Acre 7 ½ guntas allotted to the share of Appellants, the 2 - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 guntas of land as shown in the sketch as ‘A’ is allotted to the share of Smt. Jayamma, the 5 guntas of land as shown in the sketch as ‘B’ is allotted to the share of Smt. Shakuntala, the 14 ½ guntas of land as shown in the sketch as ‘C’ is allotted to the share of Sri. Nagaraj, Appellant No.2, the 1 gunta of land as shown in the sketch as ‘D’ is allotted to the share of Smt. Kamalamma, the 3 ½ guntas of land as shown in the sketch as ‘E’ is allotted to the share of Sri. Dileep Kumar and Sri. Puneeth, the 17 ½ guntas of land as shown in the sketch as ‘F’ is allotted to the share of Sri. Siddegowda, Appellant No.1 and the 4 guntas of land as shown in the sketch has been left for road. 2. In the portion of the land measuring 28 guntas in Sy.No.89/1B road has been formed by the parties. The remaining land measuring 18 ½ guntas, the land measuring 9 ¼ guntas on the Western side is allotted to the share of appellants and the land measuring 9 ½ guntas on the Eastern side is allotted to the share of Respondents No.1 to 7. The 9 ¼ guntas of land allotted to the share of appellants has been equally divided between the appellants No.1 and 2. The Western portion measuring 0.4.6 guntas is allotted to the share of Appellant No.1 and the Eastern portion measuring 0.4.6 guntas is allotted to the share of appellant no.2. The said portions have been mentioned in the sketch annexed to this Compromise petition. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 The Appellants No.3 to 7 have no manner of right, title and interest over the said land. 3. The respondent No.5 is entitled for the compensation amount in respect of 1 acre 14 gutnas in Sy.No.195. Smt. Susheela i.e., the respondent No.4(a) to 4(c) is entitled for the compensation amount in respect of the 1 acre 12 guntas in Sy.No.195. The remaining extent of 1 acre 14 guntas was already sold by the respondents no.1 to 3 in favour of respondent no.8. 4. The compensation amount in respect of Sy.No.105/5 measuring 34 guntas is deposited in LAC No.46/2022 before the court of 2nd Addl. Sr. Civil Judge, Mysuru and same shall be divided as follows: a) The respondent no.3 is entitled to draw the compensation amount or enhance compensation amount in respect of 12 guntas. b) The respondent No.4(a) to 4(c) are entitled for compensation amount or enhance compensation amount in respect of 11 guntas. c) The respondent No.5 is entitled for compensation amount or enhance compensation amount in respect of 11 guntas. The remaining parties do not have any right or claim over the said compensation amount. 5. The compensation amount in respect of Sy.No.96/53 measuring 4 acres is deposited in LAC No.49/2022 before the 2nd Addl. Sr. Civil Judge, - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 Mysuru and the appellant No.1 is entitled for compensation in respect of 5 guntas of land and appellant No.2 is entitled for compensation in respect of 5 guntas of land and respondent No.1 is entitled for compensation in respect of 1 acre of land and the LR’s of Respondent No.4 is entitled for 1 acre of land and the respondent No.5 is entitled for 1 acre and the remaining extent of 30 guntas will be allotted to the share of respondent No.3. The remaining parties are not entitled for any compensation amount in respect of the above said lands. 6. The appellants shall withdraw the RFA No.896/2017. 7. The parties admit and confirm that they have no claim against each other or against any other properties belonging to the parties or their family members. 8. The parties declare that they have entered into this compromise voluntarily and without any force and without any undue influence and out of their own volition. There is no fraud in entering in to this compromise. 3. Learned counsel for appellants has filed a memo dated 28.04.2025 stating that appellant No.6(a) Sri Mahadeva who is the husband of Smt.Gayatri, Appellant - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 No.6 has not succeeded any right in the suit properties and he has no right in the suit properties and his children that is Appellants No.6(b) and 6(c) have succeeded the estate of deceased appellant No.6-Smt Gayathri. Hence, appellant No.6(a) has not signed the compromise petition. The memo is taken on record. 4. Learned counsel for appellants has also filed a memo dated 29.04.2025 stating that the respondent No.8- Sri Mahadevu who is the purchaser of portion of Schedule ‘A’ of the suit properties and the appellants are not claiming any right over the said property. The respondent No.8 was placed ex-parte in the Trial Court and he has been served with the notice of the above and he has not represented in the above appeal. Hence, the respondent No.8 has not signed the Compromise Petition and the appellants have given up their claim against respondent No. 8. The memo is taken on record. 5. Learned counsel for respondents has filed a memo stating that respondent Nos.1 to 7 have relinquished their - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 rights in respect of the property which is sold in favour of the respondent No.8. The said memo is taken on record. 6. The contents of the compromise petition filed by appellants and respondents is read over to the appellants and respondents in the language known to them. They have agreed to the terms mentioned in the compromise petition voluntarily. In terms of the compromise petition and aforesaid memos, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER The appeal is disposed of. The judgment and decree rendered by the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mysuru in O.S.No.917/2006 dated 14.12.2012 is hereby modified in terms of the compromise petition filed by the parties to the proceedings. Registry to draw the decree accordingly. Learned counsel for appellants has filed a memo for withdrawal of RFA.No.896/2017 as appellants have settled - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC:17982-DB RFA No. 125 of 2013 C/W RFA No. 896 of 2017 the disputed between the respondents and they do not wish to prosecute the appeal. The memo is placed on record. In terms of the said memo RFA.No.896/2017 is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (K.SOMASHEKAR) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RJ