- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18034-DB RFA No. 100153 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI R.F.A. NO.100153 OF 2022 (PAR/POS) BETWEEN: 1. VIJAYAKUMAR S/O. MOUNESH KAMMAR, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAUNSHI, TQ. KUNDAGOL, DIST. DHARWAD, P.C.NO.581113. 2. VISHWANATH S/O. MOUNESH KAMMAR, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAUNSHI, TQ. KUNDAGOL, DIST. DHARWAD, P.C.NO.581113. 3. VIKRAM S/O MOUNESH KAMMAR, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAUNSHI, TQ. KUNDAGOL, DIST. DHARWAD, P.C.NO.581113. 4. SMT. LALITHA W/O. MOUNESH KAMMAR, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD & AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAUNSHI, TQ. KUNDAGOL, DIST. DHARWAD, P.C.NO.581113. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI P. G. MOGALI, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18034-DB RFA No. 100153 of 2022 AND: 1. SMT. RATNAVVA W/O. JAKKANNACHARYA ARKACHARI, AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. SAUNSHI, TQ. KUNDAGOL, DIST. DHARWAD, NOW R/O. KAMADODU, TQ. RANEBENNUR, DIST. KHAVERI, P.C.NO.581115. 2. SMT. PRAMILA (PREMA), W/O. NINGACHARYA ARKACHARI, AGE: 69 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAUNSHI, TQ. KUNDAGOL, DIST. DHARWAD, NOW R/O. KAMADODU, TQ. RANEBNNUR, DT. HAVERI, P.C.NO.581115. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI DINESH M. KULKARNI AND SRI PRASHANT C. KALE, ADV.FOR R1; SRI I. C. PATIL, ADV. FOR R2) THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED IN O.S.NO.66/2018 DT. 10.11.2021 BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT: KUNDAGOL AND DISMISS THE SUIT IN O.S.NO.66/2018 WITH COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18034-DB RFA No. 100153 of 2022 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI) 1. Appellant Nos.1 to 4 and Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are present before the court on this day along with their Counsels-Sri P.G.Mogali, Sri Dinesh M Kulkarni and Sri I.C.Patil. 2. At the request of the parties, this Court vide Order dated 06.08.2025 had referred the matter for mediation to the Mediation Centre, High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad. Pursuant to the same, today a report is received from the Mediation centre reporting the settlement along with a memorandum of agreement under Section 89 of CPC read with Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules 2007. Accordingly, the parties to the appeal are present before the Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18034-DB RFA No. 100153 of 2022 3. This is an appeal filed by Defendant Nos.1 to 4 in O.S.No.66/2018 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kundgol, wherein the trial Court decreed the suit filed by Respondent No.1 herein, holding that she is entitled for partition and separate possession of her 1/3rd share in the schedule properties by metes and bounds. The case papers reveal that there are six items of properties mentioned in the suit schedule. 4. Under the memorandum of agreement entered into by the parties to the appeal, Respondent No.1/the Plaintiff has conceded that an extent of three guntas in Survey No.79/3 has been acquired by PWD for formation of road and that 11 guntas of land in Survey No.150 has been acquired by the Government for public purpose. Further, the Plaintiff has agreed to take an extent of 3 acres in Survey No.821/5 out of total extent of 3 acres 21 guntas in the said land, in full and final settlement of her claim and by clarifying that she has no claim on remaining schedule properties. Similarly, Respondent No.2, who was Defendant No.5 before - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18034-DB RFA No. 100153 of 2022 the trial Court, has admitted of having already received some cash and gold from the appellants herein and having agreed to receive a further sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from the appellants within one month from the date of recording the compromise and stated that she has no claim over the schedule properties. 5. On questioning, the Appellants and the Respondents have stated that they have subscribed their signatures to the memorandum of agreement voluntarily and having understood its contents and the consequence. The contents of memorandum of agreement indicate that the compromise entered into between the parties is legal and in the interest of both parties. Hence, the following: ORDER The memorandum of agreement filed under Section 89 of CPC read with Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules 2007 is accepted. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18034-DB RFA No. 100153 of 2022 Consequently, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the above referred memorandum of agreement. Sd/- (R.DEVDAS) JUDGE Sd/- (B. MURALIDHARA PAI) JUDGE VB /CT-AN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1