- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10450 RFA No. 100505 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100505 OF 2018 (SP-) BETWEEN: H. SREENIVASA REDDY S/O. HULUKAL HANUMA REDDY AGED 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST AND MERCHANT, R/O. DOOR NO.5, SBI COLONY, MOKA ROAD, W.NO.21, OLD W.NO.18, BALLARI, AND PROPRIETOR OF M/S. VENKATESHWARA AGRO CHEMICALS, NO.3, HAVINAL BASANNA COMPLEX, K.C ROAD, BALLARI-583101. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. K.L. PATIL, ADV) AND: P. BHEEMAREDDY S/O. P. MALLAREDDY AGED 55 YEARS, WORKING IN JSW STEELS, R/O. DOOR NO.159/5D, TAHASILDAR COMPOUND, OPP: NCC OFFICE, CANTONMENT, BALLARI-583101. &RESPONDENT (BY SRIYUTHS. V.M. SHEELVANT AND VINAY S. KOUJALAGI, ADVS FOR RESPONDENT) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DTD:31.10.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO. 173/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BALLARI, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.08.22 12:56:02 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10450 RFA No. 100505 of 2018 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) The appellant and respondent along with their respective counsel are present before this court. The parties are identified by their respective counsel. 2. The appellant and the respondent have amicably settled their dispute, and filed the compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC, which reads as follows. In this the Appellant and Respondent most respectfully submit as under; 1. It is submitted that the Plaintiff/Respondent herein had filed suit bearing O.S. No. 173/2011 on the file of 1st Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Ballari seeking relief of specific performance of contract to execute the sale deed in respect of property bearing Sy.No.117 (out of) measuring 7 acres 8 cents situated at Kakkabevinahalli village of Tq. & Dist, Ballari. 2. It is submitted that the Court below by its Judgment and Decree dated: 31/10/2018 passed by 1st Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Ballari, in O.S. No. 173/2011, thereby decreeing the Suit of plaintiff, Being aggrieved by the said Judgment & Decree - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10450 RFA No. 100505 of 2018 dated 31/10/2018 the Defendant Appellant preferred this appeal. 3. The parties to the dispute have amicably settled their dispute at the instance of elders of the family and village in the following terms. (1) Both the parties have no objection to dismiss the suit filed by respondent herein/plaintiff. (ii) It is submitted that in view of the compromise the plaintiff/Respondent wish to withdraw the suit and his claim over the suit property. Further he will not claim any right over the property in future. Further, either of the parties to the appeal have no other claim over each other whatsoever. 4. It is submitted that, in view of the compromise the Hon'ble Court be directed the Registry of this Hon'ble Court to refund the entire court fee paid by the Appellant herein. 5. Both the parties have no objection to draw the decree accordingly. Wherefore, under these circumstances the Hon'ble Court may kindly be dismiss O.S. No. 173/2011on the file of 1st Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Ballari and order to draw a Decree in terms of compromise, in the interest of justice and equity. 3. The contents of the compromise petition are read over and explained to the parties in the Kannada language, known to them, and they have accepted the terms and conditions of the compromise petition. The - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10450 RFA No. 100505 of 2018 parties submit that the appeal may be disposed of, in terms of the compromise petition. There is no legal impediment in accepting the compromise petition, and the contents of the compromise petition are not contrary to public policy. 4. The compromise petition is placed on record. 5. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed off, in terms of the compromise petition. 6. The office is directed to draw the decree, in terms of the compromise petition. 7. The office is directed to refund the court fee, in favour of the appellant, in terms of Section 66 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958. 8. In view of disposal of the appeal, pending I.A9s if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE MBS CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13