- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7846 RSA No. 100695 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL RSA NO.100695 OF 2022 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: BEERAPPA S/O. SHIDDAPPA KATTIKAR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KULAGERI – 587 201, TAL: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT. … APPELLANT (BY SRI. SAJID AHMED GOODWALA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BALAVVA (DECEASED) W/O. SHIDAPPA KATTIKAR, 1A. DODDASIDDAVA W/O. HANAMANT SIGGAR, AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD , R/O: KULAGERI – 587 201, TAL: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT. 1B. SHIDDAVA W/O. APPANNA HANIN, AGE: 71 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KULAGERI – 587 201, TAL: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT. 1C. SOMAVVA W/O. SHIDDAPPA ALLAPPANAVAR, AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KULAGERI – 587 201, Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7846 RSA No. 100695 of 2022 TAL: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT. 2. BHIMAPPA S/O. SANGAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE , R/O: KULAGERI – 587 201, TAL: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT. 3. MUTTAPPA S/O. SANGAPPA KUMBAR AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KULAGERI – 587 201, TAL: BADAMI, DIST: BADAMI – 587 201. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1(A TO C); SRI. C.S.SHETTAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.09.2020 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BADAMI IN R.A.NO.25/2017 CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 21.08.2017 PASSED BY THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. BADAMI IN O.S.NO.145/2009 BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND ETC., THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7846 RSA No. 100695 of 2022 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL) 1. This appeal is filed by the defendant No.1 aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 21.08.2017 passed in OS No.145/2009 on the file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Badami (for short, ‘Trial Court’), which is confirmed by the judgment and order dated 16.09.2020 passed in RA Nos.25 and 26 of 2017 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Badami (for short, ‘First Appellate Court’). 2. The said suit was filed by one Smt. Balavva W/o. Shiddappa Kattikar, who was the mother of defendant No.1 and present respondent Nos.1A, 1B and 1C, for relief of declaration and consequential relief of injunction. 3. The defendant No.1 had sold an extent of 6 acres 6 guntas of land forming part of RS Nos.95 and 33/2 of Kulageri village in favour of defendant Nos.2 and 3 in terms of sale deed dated 17.02.2005. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7846 RSA No. 100695 of 2022 4. By the aforesaid judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court and confirmed by the First Appellate Court, Smt. Balavva has been declared to be the absolute owner of the entire extent of suit schedule properties and it has been held that the sale deed executed by defendant No.1 in favour of defendant Nos.2 and 3 is illegal and not binding on her. 5. It appears that the said Smt. Balavva passed away during the pendency of the appeal before the First Appellate Court. Consequent upon which, her daughters namely Doddasiddava, Shiddava and Somavva were brought on record who are respondent Nos.1A, 1B and 1C in this appeal. 6. Today a compromise petition and Order XXIII Rule 3 of Civil Procedure Code, is filed by the parties to the appeal reporting amicable resolution of the dispute. The said compromise petition and the terms of understanding agreed between the parties read as under: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7846 RSA No. 100695 of 2022 “In this the Appellant and Respondents most respectfully submit as under: 1. That one Balawwa W/o. Shiddappa Kattikar had filed suit in O.S. No. 145/2009 against this Appellant and Respondents 2 and 3 before the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Court at Badami seeking for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction. The said suit came to be decreed being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, Appellant herein had filed an appeal in R.A.No.25/2017 and Respondents 2 and 3 herein had filed another independent appeal in R.A. No. 26/2017 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Badami. Both the appeals came to be dismissed by the First Appellate Court under the common judgment and decree dated: 16-09-2020. Being aggrieved by the same the Appellant is now before this Hon'ble Court in this appeal. 2. It is submitted that pending this appeal, at the intervention of elders, the parties have agreed to amicably resolve the lis as per the following terms: A. The properties allotted to the share of Respondents 1A to 1C namely, 1A. Doddasiddavva W/o. Hanamant Kattikar, 1B. Shiddavva W/o. Appanna Hannin, 1C. Somavva W/o. Shiddappa Allappanavar. i. R.S. No. 22 measuring 3 acre 25 guntas assessed at Rs. 8.09 situate at Kulageri village of Badami Taluk. B. The properties allotted to the share of Appellant Beerappa S/o. Shiddappa Kattikar. i. R.S. No. 30 measuring 12 acre 21guntas assessed at Rs. 24.93 situate at Kulagerivillage of Badami Taluk. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7846 RSA No. 100695 of 2022 ii. R.S. No. 33/1 measuring 1 acre 10 guntas assessed at Rs. 2.34 situate at Kulageri village of Badami Taluk. C. Appellant and Respondents herein admit the sale deeds dated: 17-02-2005 executed by Defendant No. 1 in favour of Defendants 2 and 3. Properties alienated to Respondents 3 and 4 namely 3. Bhimappa S/o. Sangappa Kumbar, 4. Muttappa S/o. Sangappa Kumbar. i. R.S. No. 33/2 measuring 5 acre 25guntas assessed at Rs. 10.75 situate at Kulageri village of Badami Taluk. ii. R.S. No. 95 measuring 21 guntas assessed at Rs. 1.01 situate at Kulageri village of Badami Taluk. iii. It is hereby admitted by the parties herein that the existing loan on suit Item No. 1 to 3 properties shall be repaid by Appellant herein. Appellant undertakes to clear the outstanding loan on property jointly allottedto respondent No.1A to 1C and in the event of his default respondent No.1A to 1C shall have right to recover the same by way of claiming proportionate share in properties fallen to his share i.e., R.S. No. 30 measuring 12 acre 21guntas assessed at Rs. 24.93 situate at Kulageri village of Badami Taluk, R.S. No. 33/1 measuring 1 acre 10guntas assessed at Rs. 2.34 situate at Kulageri village of Badami Taluk and R.S. No. 76/2 measuring 5 acre 17 guntas assessed at Rs. 6.30 situate at Chirlakoppa village of Badami Taluk. iv. It is also admitted that the said existing loan on suit item No. 2 property is not binding on the right, title and interest of Respondents 1A to 1C. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7846 RSA No. 100695 of 2022 3. It is submitted that the parties hereby admit that they shall co-operate in getting revenue entries in respect of the lands allotted to their respective shares under this compromise. In the event if any of the parties fail to co-operate, the othersreserve right to get the decree executed in due course of law. 4. That there is no coercion, undue influence, mistake or misrepresentation in arriving at this compromise. Hence, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to accept this compromise petition and allow the appeal and thereby modify the decree in terms of this settlement in the ends of justice.” 7. Appellant-Beerappa, respondent Nos.1A, 1B and 1C namely Doddasiddava, Shiddava and Somavva as well as respondent Nos.2 and 3 namely Bhimappa and Muttappa respectively are present before this Court. Along with appellant his son Arjun and along with respondent Nos.1B and 1C their sons Dyavappa and Hanumanth respectively are also present before this Court. Parties are represented by their counsel. 8. This Court enquired with the respondent Nos.1A, 1B, 1C and sons of respondent Nos.1B and 1C as well as the respondent Nos.2 and 3 who are the purchasers of - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7846 RSA No. 100695 of 2022 properties regarding the terms of compromise and in interaction it is found that, they have understood the terms of compromise and hence, agreed to resolve the matter accordingly. 9. Learned counsel for defendant Nos.2 and 3/respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein submits that parties in addition will execute necessary deed of relinquishment/confirmation in favour of respondent Nos.2 and 3 apart from having the compromise decree registered as required under law. 10. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the view that terms of compromise are not opposed to any provisions of law and as the parties have understood the terms of the compromise petition, same can be accepted and taken on record. 11. The compromise petition is taken on record. 12. The suit in OS No.145/2009 is disposed off in terms of the compromise. The judgement and decree dated - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7846 RSA No. 100695 of 2022 21.08.2017 passed by the Trial Court is accordingly modified. Accordingly, appeal is disposed off. 13. Registry to draw decree in terms of compromise petition. 14. Pending applications, if any, are disposed off accordingly. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE SMM/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3