- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38285 RFA No. 380 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 380 OF 2016 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: SRI C PUTTAIAH SINCE DECEASED BY LRS. SMT. PUTTAMMA, W/O LATE PUTTAIAH, DIED ON 28.01.2016. 1. SRI P RAMACHANDRA S/O LATE PUTTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO. 22, LAKSHMINARASIMHASWAMY NILAYA, ANNAPOORNESHWARINAGAR, BANGALORE -560 091. 2. SRI P RAVIKUMAR S/O LATE PUTTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. 3. SRI P BETTASWAMY S/O LATE PUTTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS. SL.NO.2 & 3 ARE RESIDING AT KAMAKSHIPALYA, NEAR AMABHAVANI TEMPLE, 1ST MAIN, MAGADI ROAD, BANGALORE -560 079. 4. SMT. KAMALAMMA W/O NANJAPPA, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38285 RFA No. 380 of 2016 AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS. 5. SMT. YESHODAMMA W/O SHIVALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS. 6. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVI W/O JAGADISH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS. 7. SMT. NAGARATHNA D/O LATE PUTTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS. SL.NO.4 TO 7 ARE RESIDING AT VRUSHABHAVATHI NAGAR, 5TH MAIN, NEAR MUNESHWARA TEMPLE, KAMAKSHIPALYA, BANGALORE - 560 079. 8. SRI K C CHANNANARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS. SMT. THIMMAKKA, W/O LATE K.C.CHANNANARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. 9. 9(a) 9(b) 9(c) SRI C NAGARAJU SINCE DEAD BY LRS. SMT.H.C. PUSHPA W/O. LATE NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. GOWRAV K.N. S/O. LATE NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS. MASTER SREYAS K.N. S/O. LATE NAGARAJU - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38285 RFA No. 380 of 2016 AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS. ALL ARE R/AT. NO.154, 2ND MAIN ROAD, NEAR ITI COLLEGE ROAD, TUNGANAGARA, HEROHALLI, BANGALORE - 560091. THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE NO.9(C) SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED THROUGH THEIR MOTHER L.R. NO.9(A) SMT. H.C.PUSHPA. 10. SRI C BASAVARAJU S/O LATE K.C.CHANNANARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. 11. SMT. NARASAMMA D/O LATE K.C.CHANNANARASIMHAIAH, W/O HANUMANTHEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS. ALL ARE R/AT NO. 34/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD, NEAR AMBHMAHESHWARI TEMPLE, KAMAKSHIPALYA, BANGALORE - 560 079 12. SRI K C RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O LATE CHENNIGAPPA, R/AT KAMAKSHIPALAY, NEAR AMBHABHAVANI TEMPLE, 1ST MAIN, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 079. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI NAGAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38285 RFA No. 380 of 2016 1. SRI B SHANKAR YADAV @ B SHANKAR MAJOR IN AGE, R/AT NO. 33, BESIDE SHANIMAHATUMA TEMPLE, BASAVESWARANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 079. 2. SRI A NATARAJAN S/O APPUASARI, MAJOR IN AGE, R/AT MARUTHI NILAYA, MATHIKERE BANGALORE - 560 054. 3. M/S MALLESHWARAM TAILORING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY NO.20, 2ND MAIN, KODANDARAMAPURAM, BANGALORE - 560 003 (REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY). …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M.K. VENKATARAMANA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O. DATED 16.10.2019, APPEAL AGAINST R2 & R3 - STANDS DISMISSED) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.12.2015 PASSED IN OS.NO.8397/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE XIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION, POSSESSION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38285 RFA No. 380 of 2016 ORAL JUDGMENT Challenging judgment and decree dated 19.12.2015 passed by XIV Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore, in O.S.no.8397/2002, this appeal is filed plaintiffs. 2. During pendency of matter, as per submission of learned counsel, matter was referred for Mediation before Smt.Manjula Tejaswi, Mediator. It is, today, submitted that Mediation has been successful and an agreement drawn under Section 89 of CPC, which is signed by parties, is placed and same reads as follows- "a) It is agreed, understood and clarified between the parties that in view of the settlement the Appellants have no manner of right, title, interest and ownership over the Appeal Schedule Property and no claim against the First Respondent and other respondents with respect to the Appeal Schedule Property and the Appellants also confirms the right, title and lawful possession and enjoyment of the First Respondent exclusively over the Appeal Schedule Property (suit schedule property below the trial court). However, out of goodwill and good gesture, the First Respondent has agreed to pay a Sum Rs.11,00,000-00 (Rupees Eleven Lakhs only) to the Appellants, being full and final settlement of their present dispute with respect to the Appeal Schedule Property (suit schedule property below the trial court) and all the appellants have also agreed to receive the same. Further the First Respondent has agreed to pay aforesaid amount of Rs.11,00,000-00 (Rupees Eleven Lakhs only) by way of Demand Draft in the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38285 RFA No. 380 of 2016 name of Appellant No:1-Sri P. Ramachandra, Son of Late Puttaiah, who has agreed to receive the same for himself and also on behalf of all other Appellants for which other Appellants have agreed and consented to hand over the Demand Draft in favor of Appellant No: 1 on their behalf and all the appellants have acknowledged the receipt of the same. The First Respondent has come forward to hand over the said Demand Draft to the afore said Appellant No. 1 before this Hon'ble Court, on the date of reporting their settlement and the Appellants have agreed, received and given their free consent for the same. b) The Appellants also indemnify and shall keep indemnified the First Respondent, its purchasers, permitted Assignees, Successors(s) in title, heirs, executors, administrators and legal representatives against any future claim (s) case (s) and / or proceedings over the Appeal Schedule Property by any of their family member(s). c) That Appellants, in view of the aforesaid full and final settlement with respect to their full claim of the appellants have agreed to concede to the absolute ownership of the First respondent over Appeal Schedule Property, which is under the physical possession and enjoyment of First Respondent and have further agreed that they will not disturb his peaceful possession and ownership of the Appeal Schedule Property in his own right, title and interest as absolute Owner. In order to obviate, by filing any litigations, both the parties have agreed to enter into this memorandum of Agreement/Settlement. d). That the Appellants have no objection to confirm the Judgement and decree dated 19/12/2015, passed in 0.S. No:8397/2002 by Learned Judge of XIV Additional City Civil Judge, at Bengaluru City (CCH-28) and thereby confirm the right, title of the schedule property in favor of first respondent is hereby confirmed by all the Appellants. This Settlement has fully, mutually, conclusively, finally settled all the outstanding differences between the parties and that there are - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38285 RFA No. 380 of 2016 no claims by the appellants against Respondents over the Appeal Schedule Property." 3. Parties are present and are identified by respective counsel. On interaction, they have stated that terms of compromise have been explained to them and after understanding same, they have affirmed them out of their free will and volition without there any threat, coercion or undue influence from anybody. 4. As per terms of settlement, a demand draft bearing no.961340 dated 22.09.2025 drawn on Bharat Co-operative Bank (Mumbai) Ltd., in favour of P.Ramachandra, appellant no.1, for a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh only), is handed over. Acknowledgement of receipt is stated to be by P.Ramachandra for and on behalf of all appellants. 5. Perused terms of compromise. They appear to be lawful. Compromise Petition is accepted. 6. Appeal is allowed to the extent and in terms of settlement, judgment and decree dated 19.12.2015 passed by XIV Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore, in O.S.no.8397/2002 is modified. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38285 RFA No. 380 of 2016 7. Since appeal is disposed of as settled, appellants would be entitled for refund of admissible Court fee. 8. It is seen that Mediation was conducted by Private Mediator. Initially fee was fixed at Rs.5,000/-, which is stated to have been paid. On enquiry, it is stated that Mediation spread over 8 (eight) sessions and was conducted extensively. 9. Under above circumstances, it is found appropriate to fix Mediator's Fee at Rs.20,000/-, balance amount of Rs.15,000/- to be paid by parties by sharing it equally. Acknowledgment for payment to be filed in Registry within one week. 10. Registry to draw decree incorporating terms of compromise. In view of disposal of petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2