- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10198 RFA No. 100001 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100001 OF 2023 (DEC/INJ-) BETWEEN: 1. ALLISAB S/O RAJESAB SHETSANADI AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE SERVICES R/O. GAMANAGATTI NAVANAGAR, TQ. HUBBALLI. 2. SMT. SHAMSHAD BEGUM W/O LATE IMAMSAB SHETSANADI, AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. GAMANAGATTI NAVANAGAR, TQ. HUBBALLI. 3. GOUSAMALUDDIN S/O IMAMSAB SHETSANADI AGE. 27 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GAMANAGATTI, NAVANAGAR, TQ. HUBBALLI. 4. SMT. FATHIMA W/O LATE MAHABOOBASAHEB SHETSANADI, AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. GAMANAGATTI, NAVANAGAR, TQ. HUBBALLI. 5. HUSSAIN S/O MAHABOOBASAHEB SHETSANADI, AGE. 23 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. GAMANAGATTI NAVANAGAR, TQ. HUBBALLI. MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.08.22 12:57:31 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10198 RFA No. 100001 of 2023 6. AYESHA D/O MAHABOOBASAHEB SHETSANADI AGE. 21 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. GAMANAGATTI NAVANAGAR, TQ. HUBBALLI. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B. HIREMATH, ADV) AND: 1. IMTIYAZ S/O MEHABOOBSAB DHARWAD AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. GAMANAGATTI, NAVANAGAR, TQ. HUBBALLI-580001. 2. MOHAMMED SHARIF S/O MAHABOOBSAB DHARWAD, AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. GAMANAGATTI, NAVANAGAR, TQ. HUBBALLI-580001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VISHWANATH S. BICHAGATTI, ADV FOR R1 & R2) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 96 READ WITH ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DTD 07.12.2022 PASSED IN O.S.NO.274/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, HUBBALLI, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10198 RFA No. 100001 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) The appellants and the respondents along with their respective counsel, are present before this court. They are identified by their respective counsel. 2. The appellants and the respondents have amicably settled their dispute and filed the compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC, which reads as follows: “Appellants and respondents most respectfully submit as under:- 1. The respondents had filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction, declaring that they have become owners of the suit property by virtue of memorandum of oral gift dated 22 12, 1998 in O.S.No.274 of 2021 on the file of Ist Additional Senior Civil Judge., Hubballi. The said suit came to be decreed on 7.12.2022. This appeal is filed challenging the said judgement and decree. Suit property is a agricultural land bearing Block No.252 measuring 20 guntas situated at Gamanagatti village, Taluka Hubballi. 2. Respondent had claimed that father of appellant No.1 has made oral gift of suit property in their favour on 22.12.1998. The said gift is held to be proved by the trial court. 3. During the pendency of this appeal both the parties l.e., appellants and respondents have - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10198 RFA No. 100001 of 2023 mutually agreed to dispose of the suit property and share the consideration amount. In terms thereof, the compromise is entered which is as under: i. In view of the property being put for sale one Mr Mohammed Rafiq s/o Husensab Savanatavar has offered to purchase the suit property for a total consideration of Rs.20,00,000/-. Accordingly both appellants and respondents have jointly executed agreement of sale on 10.07.2025. Appellants share out of total sale consideration is Rs.7,00,000/- out of which they have already received Rs.3,00,000 as earnest money. Likewise respondents share out of sale consideration is Rs.13,00,000 out which they have received Rs.5,00,000/-under agreement of sale. ii. Both appellants and respondents have jointly agreed to execute the sale deed in favour of prospective buyer after getting the entry of stay in RoR deleted. Both appellants and respondents have agreed to co-operate for getting the stay deleted from RoR. iii. If either of the parties refuse to adhere to terms of compromise and fails to share the sale consideration both are at liberty to file execution petition to recover their respective share of consideration. iv. There is no force, coercion or undue influence upon the appellants and respondents in filing this compromise petition. Appellants and respondents are aware and consequences of the terms and they have out of their free will and consent have entered into this compromise petition. 4. In view of the above terms all the rival contentions raised by parties contrary to terms of this compromise petition are hereby given up. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10198 RFA No. 100001 of 2023 5. Both appellants and respondents agree to co- operate with each other for getting the entry deleted in RoR with regard to stay granted by this Hon'ble court. The contents of above compromise petition are read over to us in the vernacular language known to both appellants and respondents have understood and agreed for the same. Wherefore, appellants and respondents pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to modify the judgment and decree of trial court in in O.S.No.274 of 2021 on the file of Ist Additional Senior Civil Judge., Hubballi.” 3. The contents of the compromise petition was read over and explained to the parties in Kannada language, and they have accepted the terms and conditions of the compromise petition. 4. I have perused the contents of the compromise petition. 5. The compromise petition is taken on record. 6. There is no legal impediment in accepting the compromise petition. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed off, in terms of the compromise petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10198 RFA No. 100001 of 2023 8. The office is directed to draw the decree, in terms of the compromise petition. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE MBS CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40