- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6016 WP No. 104719 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 104719 OF 2016 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. PARVATEVVA W/O. GURUPADAPPA HOSAMANI SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRs. VEERUPAXEPPA S/O. VEERABADRAPPA HOSAMANI, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRI, R/O: CHACHADI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. VEERABADRAPPA S/O. SANGAPPA HOSAMANI, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRI, R/O: CHACHADI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ANIL KALE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CHAMBANNA S/O. PARAPPA GANAGI, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRs., SHIVALINGAVVA W/O. MALLAPPA GANAGI, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: HIREBAGEWADI, TQ AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. PARAPPA S/O. CHAMBANNA GANAGI, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: CHACHADI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. SMT. IRAVVA W/O. CHANNAPPA GANAGI, Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.04.25 14:30:31 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6016 WP No. 104719 of 2016 AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: INCHAL, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 4. IRAPPA S/O. CHAMBANNA GANAGI, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: CHACHADI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 5. CHANDRAPPA S/O. CHAMBANNA GANAGI, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE, R/O: CHACHADI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 6. SMT. NEELAVVA W/O. RUDRAPPA GANAGI, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: NEGINAHAL, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI. 7. MAHANTESH S/O. TAMMANNA PATIL, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE HOLD, R/O: K.K. KOPPA, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.M.DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3, R5 AND R6; SMT.SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4; NOTICE TO R7 IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, QUASH THE COMPROMISE DECREE PASSED IN O.S.NO.274/2012 DATED 19.11.2012, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAUNDATTI AT: SAUNDATTI AND ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE EXECUTING COURT IN THE EXECUTION NO.10/2015 TO PASS NECESSARY ORDERS ON I.A.NO.III FILED BY THE PETITIONERS U/S 21 RULE 97 OF CPC VIDE ANNEXURE-F ON THE FILE OF ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAUNDATTI; ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE EXECUTION COURT IN THE EXECUTION NO.10/2015 TO PASS NECESSARY ORDERS ON I.A.NO.3 FILED BY THE PETIIONERS U/S.21 RULE 97 OF CPC., VIDE ANNEXURE-F ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAUNDATTI AND ETC. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6016 WP No. 104719 of 2016 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Petitioners 1 and 2 have filed the present writ petition questioning the compromise decree passed by Civil Judge and JMFC, Savadatti in O.S.No.274/2012 dated 19.11.2012 evidenced at Annexure-C. Consequently, mandamus is sought to direct the Executing Court to pass necessary orders on I.A.No.III filed in Execution Petition No.10/2013. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 4 and learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3, 5 and 6. 3. The facts leading to the case are as under: One Chambanna who is the ancestor of respondents 1 to 5 filed a suit for specific performance pursuant to agreement of sale executed by one Parvatevva in - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6016 WP No. 104719 of 2016 O.S.No.274/2012. In the pending suit, it appears plaintiff/agreement holder and Parvatevva who is the owner, filed joint compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of C.P.C. The Court acting on the joint compromise petition verified the veracity of the compromise petition and having satisfied itself that plaintiff and defendant have voluntarily agreed to give quietus to the lis between plaintiff and defendant proceeded to dispose of the suit in terms of joint compromise petition vide order dated 19.11.2012. The records also reveal that the Court having satisfied itself that defendant out of a free will has conceded the plaintiff’s claim passed the compromise decree. 4. On examining the record, this Court is of the view that the captioned writ petition is not maintainable. The allegation of fraud by the petitioner, who claims to be distant relative of Parvatevva cannot maintain the writ petition before this Court. Once a compromise is recorded by a competent Civil Court, the allegation of fraud, coercion, misrepresentation has to be dealt by the Court - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6016 WP No. 104719 of 2016 which has recorded compromise. Such fraud has to be substantiated by leading evidence. Therefore, this Court is of the view that this writ petition itself is not maintainable. 5. Reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail remedy in the manner known to law, writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CLK Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6