- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27361 RFA No. 415 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 415 OF 2024 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. LATE SRI. S P FRANCIS SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS 1(a) SMT. MARY FRANCIS W/O LATE SRI. S P FRANCIS, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, 2. 2(a) LATE SRI BENJAMIN THEJESVI FRANCIS SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS., SMT. RANI THEJESVI W/O LATE BENJAMIN THEJESVI FRANCIS, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 2(b) SRI. MANISH MATHEW S/O LATE BENJAMIN THEJESVI FRANCIS, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, 2(c) MISS. IRENE MATHEW D/O LATE BENJAMIN THEJESVI FRANCIS, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, 3. SMT. SUJATHA FRANCIS D/O LATE S P FRANCIS, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27361 RFA No. 415 of 2024 4. SRI. NIRPU FRANCIS S/O LATE S P FRANCIS, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT NO.1, JERUSALEM, GETHASEMANE GARDEN, OPP MANTRI ASTRA APRT, HENNUR BANDE, BANGALORE-560 043. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R GOULAY, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI.HARI S/O LATE SUBRAMANIAN, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.41/11, HENNUR BANDE, KALYAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU-560 043 …RESPONDENT THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER XLI RULE 1 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 08.12.2023 PASSED IN O.S.NO.26214/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE LXXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL UNIT, BANGALORE (CCH-74), PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND INJUNCTION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is by the defendants assailing the relief of declaration and injunction granted in O.S.No.26214 of 2013. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27361 RFA No. 415 of 2024 2. Assailing the said decree the defendants are before this Court. Today, a joint compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC is filed duly signed by defendants and plaintiff. In terms of joint compromise petition, the parties have resolved the dispute and the plaintiff has acknowledged the defendants' right and title by accepting ₹10,00,000/- and also one site which is indicated at paragraphs 6 and 8 respectively. The payment of ₹10,00,000/- is indicated at paragraph 6, while allotment of one site bearing No.7 to plaintiff is indicated at paragraph 8. 3. Today a demand draft for a sum of ₹5,00,000/- is handed over to plaintiff in the open court. The compromise petition is taken on record. 4. On a specific query posed by this Court, the plaintiff, who is present in person, acknowledged the terms and conditions set forth in the joint compromise petition. When further questioned as to whether he had perused the contents of the said petition, the plaintiff submitted that he has not engaged an advocate. However, he clarified that he does not intend to engage legal - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27361 RFA No. 415 of 2024 counsel, having already arrived at a settlement with the defendants. 5. In light of the above, this Court deemed it appropriate to read and explain the relevant portions of the joint compromise petition particularly paragraphs 6 and 8. The contents of the said paragraphs were translated into Kannada and explained to the plaintiff in open court. 6. Upon further query as to the receipt of monetary consideration, the plaintiff unequivocally stated that he had earlier received a cheque for ₹5,00,000/- prior to the filing of the compromise petition and today in open court he has received a demand draft for an additional sum of ₹5,00,000/-. Demand draft for a sum of ₹5,00,000/- is handed over to plaintiff in open Court. 7. On a careful perusal of the joint compromise petition and in view of the submissions made by the plaintiff in open court, this Court is satisfied that the compromise has been lawfully entered into by the parties. There is no allegation of coercion, undue influence, or duress. The plaintiff has voluntarily - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27361 RFA No. 415 of 2024 consented to the terms of settlement and has expressly acknowledged the right and title of the defendants. The compromise petition is found to be lawful and is accordingly accepted and placed on record. 8. In light of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No.26214/2013 on the file of the learned LXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru, stands set aside. The appeal is accordingly disposed of in terms of the joint compromise petition. The registry is directed to draw up a decree in accordance with the terms set out in the joint compromise petition. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE SBN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 87