- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11253 RSA No. 5246 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.5246 OF 2013 (PAR) BETWEEN: SHREEKANT DEVAPPA HOSAMANI AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. ILKAL, TQ: HUNAGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT-587101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SABEEL AHMED, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. GAGAN LAXMAN GUDAGUNTI AGE: 04 YEARS, MINOR, SINCE MINOR M/G BY HIS MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.2, 2. VIJAYALAXMI W/O. LAXMAN GUDAGUNTI AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. BASAVA NAGAR, ILKAL, TQ: HUNAGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT-587101. 3. NAGAPPA VENKAPPA GUDAGUNTI AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. WARD NO.7, ALMPUR PETH ILKAL, TQ: HUNAGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT. Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.09.04 12:46:59 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11253 RSA No. 5246 of 2013 4. SMT. HULAGAVVA W/O. YANKAPPA GUDAGUNTI VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 01.09.2025, THE RESPONDENTS NO. 1 TO 3 ARE TREATED AS LRS OF DECEASED RESPONDENT NO.4. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HEMANTHKUMAR L. HAVARAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; NOTICE SERVED TO R3) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S.100 OF CPC., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED:29.01.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO.5/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HUNGUND, DISMISSING THE APPEAL, FILED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED:05.12.2011 AND THE DECREE PASSED IN O.S.NO.16/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., HUNGUND, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA) Learned Counsel for the appellant has filed a Memo as to death of respondent No.4 in the month of October 2016, leaving behind respondents 1 to 3 who are already on record. In that view of the matter, respondents 1 to 3 may be treated as legal heirs of deceased respondent No.4. The other side has no objection to accept the Memo. Memo is accepted and respondents 1 to 3 are treated as legal heirs of deceased - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11253 RSA No. 5246 of 2013 Respondent No.4. Counsel for the appellant is permitted to amend the cause title. 2. Today, the joint compromise petition under Order XXIII, Rule 3 of CPC is filed. The same reads as under: “JOINT COMPROMISE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 3 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE “The appellant and the respondents 1 and 2 above named most respectfully submit this Joint Compromise Petition before this Hon’ble Court as follows: 1. That the Appellant had instituted the present second appeal before this Hon'ble Court, being aggrieved by the concurrent findings of the Courts below. The learned Senior Civil Judge, Hunagund, by judgment and decree dated 29.01.2013 passed in R.A. No.5/2012, was pleased to dismiss the appeal and thereby affirm the judgment and decree dated 05.12.2011 rendered by the learned Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Hunagund, in O.S. No.16/2011. In the said original suit, Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, as plaintiffs, had claimed partition and separate possession of their alleged share in the suit schedule property. The Appellant, being dissatisfied and prejudiced by the said judgments, had approached this Hon'ble Court by way of this second appeal, challenging the legality, correctness, and propriety of the said concurrent decrees, and seeking that the same be set aside in the interest of justice. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11253 RSA No. 5246 of 2013 2. That, during the pendency of the present second appeal, the parties, upon introspection and mutual consultation, and with the intervention of elders, well- wishers, and mediators, have reconciled their disputes and resolved to settle the matter amicably out of Court. It is respectfully submitted that the parties, in order to put an end to the multiplicity of litigation and to restore cordiality in their relationship, have voluntarily and of their own free will decided to reduce the terms of settlement into this joint compromise petition. It is further submitted that this settlement is entered into lawfully, without any coercion, undue influence, duress, or misrepresentation of facts, and is the result of conscious decision-making by both sides, who deem it in their best interest to conclude the litigation and avoid further adversarial proceedings. 3. That, the trail court was pleased to decree the suit and allotted 1/3 share in the suit schedule property and allotted 1/3 share in favor of Respondent No.3 and 1/3 share in favor of Respondent No.4 herein. Respondent No.4 is now no more during the pendency of this appeal and in view of her death the share of Respondent No.4 is devolved in favor of Respondent No.1 and 2 and also in favor of Respondent No.3 herein. 4. It is further submitted that, after death of the father of the Respondent No.1 and husband of Respondent No.2/ plaintiffs, the Respondent No. 3 and 4 have sold the suit schedule property in favor of appellant, the trial court was pleased to allot 1/3 share in favor of Respondent No.1 and 2, in view of this compromise petition Respondent No.1 and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11253 RSA No. 5246 of 2013 2 herein are agreed to relinquish their rights with respect to their share in favor of appellant herein in lie of this compromise petition, further in view of subsequent development the share received to the Respondent No.1 and 2 by the death of Respondent No.4 herein is also agreed to relinquish their rights with respect to their share in favor of appellant herein in lie of this compromise petition. 5. That, as per the terms of settlement, Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, who were the plaintiffs before the Trial Court, have accepted and acknowledged receipt of a consolidated sum of Rs.10,00,000/-(Rupees Ten Lakhs only) towards full and final settlement of their claim in respect of the suit schedule property. The said amount has been tendered by the Appellant in the form of a cheque bearing No.096546 dated 21.08.2025, issued in favor of Respondent No.1. In consideration of the aforesaid payment, Respondent Nos.1 and 2 have unequivocally and irrevocably relinquished, released, and surrendered their entire share, right, title, and interest, if any, in the suit schedule property and have declared that they have no further subsisting claim, demand, or right against the Appellant or in respect of the suit schedule property. 6. That, in view of the aforesaid lawful and binding settlement voluntarily arrived at between the parties, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to record the compromise under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and be further pleased to pass a final decree in terms of this Joint Compromise Petition. It is further prayed that the present second appeal - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11253 RSA No. 5246 of 2013 be disposed of as compromised in accordance with the terms set out herein. The parties respectfully submit that this compromise is lawful, not opposed to public policy, and shall bind not only the present parties but also their respective heirs, legal representatives, administrators, and assigns, in the interest of finality of litigation and in order to give effect to the true intention of the parties. It is further submitted that, if cheque is dishonored, this appeal may kindly be restored and order of courts below may kindly be upheld. WHEREFORE, the Appellant and Respondents No.1 and 2 most humbly pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to record the present Joint Compromise Petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and in terms thereof pass a final decree and dispose of the appeal accordingly, in the interest of justice and equity.” 3. Appellant Shreekant and Respondent No.1-Gagan L. Gudagunti and Respondent No.2-Vijayalaxmi have affixed their signatures on the Joint Compromise Petition. Sri Sabeed Ahmed, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri Hemanthkumar L. Havaragi, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 have also fixed their signatures on the compromise petition. 4. At the time of filing of the Regular Second Appeal, the age of respondent No.1-Gagan L. Gudagunti is shown as four - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11253 RSA No. 5246 of 2013 years. But today the Xerox copy of Aadhaar card of said Gagan L. Gudagunti is produced, which reveals that his date of birth is shown as 12th June 2007. The same is taken on record. In view of the Aadhaar card, they said Gagan L. Gudagunti has attained maturity. Hence he is permitted to prosecute this case. Sri Hemanthkumar L. Havaragi, learned Counsel, has filed Vakalat on behalf of respondent No.1-Gagan L Gudagunti. 5. Today, the appellant has issued cheque in favour of Smt. Vijaylaxmi and Gagan L. Gudagunti vide Cheque No.096546 dated 21st August, 2025 for Rs.10,00,000/- drawn on Axis Bank. The affidavit of Shreekant and the affidavits of Sri Gagan L. Gudagunti and Smt. Vijayalaxmi are also filed in which they have clearly stated, that compromise have been arrived with the intervention and guidance of elder and well wishers with a view to resolve the dispute once for all. 6. The contents of the compromise petition was read over to the parties, and they have clearly admitted that they are aware as to the contents of the compromise petition and have affixed their signatures without any coercion, fraud, misrepresentation or undue influence. The same is lawful. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11253 RSA No. 5246 of 2013 Hence, this Court is satisfied as to the terms and conditions of the compromise arrived at between the parties and as per the compromise petition, the applicant has paid an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- by way of cheque as stated supra. The joint compromise petition is taken on record. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: O R D E R i) In view of the compromise between the parties, Regular Second Appeal stands disposed of; ii) Registry to draw decree accordingly. The compromise petition filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure shall be made part of the decree; iii) It is made clear that if the cheque as stated above given by the appellant is dishonoured, the judgment and decree passed by the trial court, which is confirmed by the appellate court, shall automatically stand upheld. Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE lnn LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 34