- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48756 WP No. 10714 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 10714 OF 2013 (L-TER) BETWEEN: M/S. IBM INDIA LIMITED PRESTIGE TOWERS LEVEL 7 NO.99 RESIDENCY ROAD BENGALURU-560025 NOW AT EMBASSY GOLF LINKS BLOCK A 3RD FLOOR INTERMEDIATE RING ROAD DOMLUR, BENGALURU-560071 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR OF FINANCE THROUH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR. LEHAR APPAIAH, LEGAL COUNSEL …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JOSHUA HUDSON SAMUEL, ADVOCATE AND SRI. THIMMAIAH M.C., ADVOCATE) AND: MRS.PRAMEELA R WIFE OF K V GOPALAKRISHNA AGE MAJOR RESIDING AT NO.957 3RD MAIN ROAD VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560040 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. A.J.SRINIVASAN, ADVOCATE FOR C/RESPONDENT) Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48756 WP No. 10714 of 2013 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Joshua Hudson Samuel., counsel for the petitioner has appeared through video conferencing and Sri.Thimmaiah., counsel for the petitioner has appeared in person. Sri.A.J.Srinivasan., counsel for the caveator/ respondent has appeared in person. 2. Sri.Hari Bhat., Labour Relation Leader of M/s IBM India Limited, Asia Pacific, is present before the Court and he has been duly identified by his counsel Sri.Thimmaiah. Smt.Prameela.R., – respondent is present before the Court and she has been duly identified by her counsel Sri.A.J.Srinivasan. 3. Counsel for the respective parties jointly submit that the parties to the lis have settled the matter amicably and accordingly, they have filed a joint memo along with settlement - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48756 WP No. 10714 of 2013 agreement and the same may be placed on record and the Writ Petition may be disposed of in terms of the settlement agreement. 4. When queried, the parties submit that they have taken a conscious decision to settle the matter and have voluntarily signed the settlement agreement and the joint memo and if an order is passed, they shall not seek for recalling the order. 5. The oral submission made by counsel for the respective parties and the joint memo along with settlement agreement are placed on record. 6. This court has also perused clause No.3(b) of the agreement. The relief is sought to spread over the settlement amount from the date of separation i.e., 30.11.2001 till the date of settlement (effective date) to enable to the ex- employee to avail the relief under Section 89 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in terms of the law laid down by the Apex Court in SUNDARAM MOTORS PVT. LTD., VS. AMEERJAN AND ANR. (AIR 1985 SC 144) as far as the benefit sought to be conferred on respondent in terms of clause No.3(b). - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48756 WP No. 10714 of 2013 7. As far as the benefits sought in terms of aforementioned clause No.3(b) is concerned, the respondent is entitled to such benefits as applicable under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. The Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the settlement agreement. Because of disposal of the Writ Petition, pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of and interim direction if any stands discharged. SD/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE KMV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34