- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1929 RFA No. 622 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 622 OF 2012 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. A.N. SRINIVAS S/O LATE NINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/O No.836, 5TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS, M.C.LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE–560 040. 2. NAGAMMA W/O LATE N.NINGEGOWDA SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY APPELLANT NOS.1, 3 AND 4 AND RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2, WHO ARE ALREADY ON RECORD VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 17.01.2025. 3. A.N. RUKMINI D/O LATE NINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/O NO.836, 5TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH CROSS, M.C.LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE–560 040. 4. A.N.PUSHPALATHA D/O LATE NINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/O NO.836, 5TH MAIN ROAD, Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1929 RFA No. 622 of 2012 5TH CROSS, M.C.LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560040. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. H. KANTHARAJA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. A.N. DAKSHAYINI W/O B.V. SRIRAMANNA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/O BEHIND KANAKA SCHOOL ROAD, PRIYADARSHINI LAYOUT MOODALAPALYA, BANGALORE – 560 072. 2. A.N. GIRIJA W/O A.B. REVANNA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/O BEHIND KANAKA SCHOOL ROAD, PRIYADARSHINI LAYOUT MOODALAPALYA, BANGALORE – 560 072. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.M.SRINIVASA REDDY, ADVOCATE) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.02.2012 PASSED IN O.S.3745/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE I-ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1929 RFA No. 622 of 2012 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents. The appellant No.1 and respondent Nos.1 and 2 are present before the Court and they are identified by their respective counsels. 2. The parties have filed the compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC. The parties have understood the terms and conditions of the compromise and terms of the compromise is explained to them and they have understood the same. 3. In terms of the compromise, post-dated cheques are given by appellant No.1 in favour of respondent Nos.1 and 2 for a sum of Rs.18,00,000/- each and the same is acknowledged by the respondents. In the compromise petition, it is also mentioned that, if the cheques are not honoured, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 would be entitled to the share granted to them vide judgment and decree dated 15.02.2012 of the Trial Court. It is also mentioned in the compromise petition that after encashment of the said amount of Rs.18,00,000/- by each - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:1929 RFA No. 622 of 2012 of the respondents, the respondents have agreed to immediately execute a registered release deed relinquishing their right in respect of item No.1 of the suit schedule property in favour of appellant No.1 as per this compromise. 4. The Appellant Nos.3 and 4 have already executed release deed in favour of appellant No.1 and copy of the release deed is also annexed to this compromise petition. Further, in view of compromise, respondent Nos.1 and 2 also shall not claim any share out of the share of late Nagamma i.e., appellant No.2 in the suit schedule item No.1 of the property and release the same in favour of appellant No.1 in terms of the compromise petition. 5. Accordingly, the regular first appeal stands disposed of in terms of the compromise petition. The Registry is directed to draw the decree accordingly. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38