- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50713 RFA No. 1544 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1544 OF 2011 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SUGUNA MANI D/O LATE D.NANJUNDAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS R/A NO.8/1, 8TH CROSS, VICTORIA LAYOUT, BANGALORE- 560 047 2. SMT D.N.KUSUMA KUMARI D/O LATE D.NANJUNDAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS, R/A NO.543, 5TH CROSS, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BANGALORE- 560 086 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. THEJESH K.K., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHANMUKHAPPA BY KESVY & CO) AND: 1. SMT GUNAMBA W/O LATE HARANATHKUMAR SINCE DEAD HER LRS ON RECORD AS RESPONDENT NO.2 2. KUMARI H MAYURA D/O LATE HARANATH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/A DOOR NO.19(40), Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50713 RFA No. 1544 of 2011 3RD CROSS, VICTORIA LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560047 3. CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BANGALORE BY ITS COMMISSIONER, N.R.ROAD, N.R.SQUARE, BANGALORE-560023 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K SURESH DESAI., ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. S H PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R3; V/O DTD 6/11/24, R2 IS THE LRS OF DECEASED R1) THIS RFA IS FILED U/SEC.96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.04.2011 PASSED IN O.S.7893/1996 ON THE FILE OF THE XLIII-ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CCH-44, BANGALORE, PARTLY DECREEING AND PARTLY DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR THE PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT The appellants and respondent no.2, who was defendant no.3 in the Trial Court are present before the court. Second defendant, who was respondent no.1 in the appeal, is no more and she has left behind respondent - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50713 RFA No. 1544 of 2011 no.2 as only legal heir. Respondent no.3 is the Corporation of City of Bangalore, who is a formal party and defendant no.4 in the court below. 2. The parties present a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC signed by the appellants, respondents and their respective counsel. 3. The contents of the compromise are read over to the parties and they admit that the terms of the compromise depict the true terms of settlement and there is no force, undue influence or coercion in reaching out for the terms of the compromise and it is voluntary. 4. As such, there is no impediment for this Court to place the compromise petition and dispose of the appeal. 5. Hence, the following: ORDER i. The regular first appeal stands disposed of in terms of the compromise petition; - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50713 RFA No. 1544 of 2011 ii. The office is directed to draw a modify decree in terms of the compromise petition appending the copy of the compromise petition as part of the decree; iii. In view of the amicable settlement, the appellants are entitled for refund of permissible court fee; iv. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 81