- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2483-DB RFA No. 100478 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100478 OF 2018 (SP) BETWEEN: 1. DR. SHRIKANTH S/O. SHANTARAM WAGLE SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS 1A) MRS. NEETA, W/O. SHRIKANTH WAGLE AGE: 75 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O: “C” BLOCK, 1ST FLOOR, SHANTI SADAN BUILDING, FRENCH BRIDGE, OPEN HOUSE, MUMBAI-400007. 1B) MRS. VEENA, W/O. MANDAR TILVE AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O: NASA SQUARE, 90, MARIA COURT KANDELL PARK, NEW JERSEY (N.J.) 08824, U.S.A. 1C) SANDEEP, S/O. SHRIKANTH WAGLE AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: “C” BLOCK, 1ST FLOOR, SHANTI SADAN BUILDING, FRENCH BRIDGE, OPEN HOUSE, MUMBAI-400007. 1D) SAMEER, S/O. SHRIKANTH WAGLE Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA Date: 2025.02.17 15:42:26 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2483-DB RFA No. 100478 of 2018 AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: “C” BLOCK, 1ST FLOOR, SHANTI SADAN BUILDING, FRENCH BRIDGE, OPEN HOUSE, MUMBAI-400007. APPELLANTS NO.1(A) TO 1(D) HAVE BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD AS THE LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED SOLE APPELLANT V/O. DATED 27.07.2023 …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. SURABHI KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND: PRAKASH, S/O. BABURAO RANE AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O: SADASHIVAGAD-581352, TQ: KARWAR, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. GIRISH A. YADWAD, ADVOCATE) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 151 OF CPC., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:13.07.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.15/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE KARWAR, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2483-DB RFA No. 100478 of 2018 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) Appellant No.1(a, b & d) executed a general power of attorney in favour of appellant No.1(c) authorizing appellant No.1(c) to enter into compromise on their behalf. Appellant No.1(c) has produced special general power of attorney executed by appellant No.1(a), 1(b) and 1(d) and the same is taken on record. The appellant No.1(c) and the respondents are present. They are identified by their respective counsel. The parties to the appeal have filed a compromise petition, which reads as under: “1. It is submitted that the suit schedule properties are as under: i. Sy.No.44A1A/13 measuring 7 Guntas 4 Aanas ii. Sy.No.42A1/3 measuring 2 Guntas 11.5 Aanas iii. Sy.No. 43 measuring 3 Guntas 12 Aanas Situated at Baad village, Karwar taluk, Uttara Kannada district. 2. It is submitted that the Respondent instituted a suit in OS No.15/2010 for specific performance of contract dated 16.09.2007 against the original Defendant in respect of the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2483-DB RFA No. 100478 of 2018 suit property on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Karwar. The Trial Court decreed the suit on 13.07.2018 directing the Original Defendant to execute registered sale deed in favour of Plaintiff /Respondent by receiving balance sale consideration within two months. 3. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 13.07.2018 passed in OS No.15/2010 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Karwar, the Original Defendant filed the present appeal. After the death of Original Defendant, his legal heirs Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) have come on record. 4. During pendency of the present appeal the Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) and Respondent have amicably settled the dispute with the intervention of elders and their well-wishers on following terms: i. The Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) and Respondent admit that the suit schedule properties are totally measuring 14,938.5 sq.ft. and is shown in the hand sketch annexed to this petition as 'ABCDEFJH’ and the same is part of this compromise petition. ii. The Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) agree to get their names entered in the revenue records on or before 04.05.2025, and further agree to execute a registered sale deed in respect of the portion 'ABCDEFGH’ shown in the hand sketch, measuring 9079.06sq.ft., in favour of the Respondent for a sale consideration of Rs.18,83,995.74/-(Rs.207.51/- per sq.ft. x 9079.06 sq.ft.) free from all encumbrances, and hand over the possession of the said extent to the Respondent on the date of execution of sale deed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2483-DB RFA No. 100478 of 2018 iii. Once the revenue records are mutated and the same is informed to the Respondent on or before 04.05.2025, the Respondent shall then be required to make arrangements, by keeping the amount of sale consideration and stamp duty ready, for execution of the sale deed and call upon the Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) to execute the sale deed, if there are no further regulatory requirements to be fulfilled. In the event there are any regulatory requirements as per the local laws, such as obtaining e-swattu etc., the Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) and Respondent can seek for extension of the date of execution of the sale deed, which shall not be beyond three months thereafter. iv. Once the sale deed is executed, the Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) and the Respondent shall get the work of sub-division etc. done jointly by bearing the costs in equally. v. The Respondent admits that the Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) are the absolute owners in possession of a portion of the suit schedule properties shown in the hand sketches 'HGFJ’ measuring 5859.43 sq.ft. In the event the area remaining after deducting 9079.06 sq.ft., is more than 5859.44 sq.ft., the excess area shall belong to the Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d). vi. The Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) shall put up a solid cement compound wall surrounding the area retained by them shown as ‘HGFJ’ within one month from the date of execution of the sale deed, at their own cost. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2483-DB RFA No. 100478 of 2018 vii. The Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) and Respondent shall have no objection to get their names entered in respect of their respective portion of the suit schedule properties in the revenue records. viii. In view of the above compromise, the Respondent shall have no right, title or interest based on the oral agreement dated 16.09.2007 in respect of the portion shown as HGFJ' in the hand sketch, measuring 5859.43 sq.ft. ix. Pursuant to the execution of the sale deed as mentioned in Clause (ii) and (iii) of this compromise, the Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) shall have no right, title or interest in respect of portion shown as 'ABCEFGH’ shown in the hand sketch, measuring 9079.06 sq.ft. x. In the event the Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) fail to execute the registered sale deed as mentioned in Clause (ii), (iii)or to put up a compound wall as stated in Clause (vi) of this petition, the Respondent is at liberty to execute this compromise in accordance with law. xi. In the event the Respondent fails to come forward to pay an amount of Rs.18,83,995.74/-as mentioned in Clause (ii) and (iii), of this petition, the Respondent is estopped from claiming right in respect of the suit schedule properties either as per the impugned decree or under this compromise. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2483-DB RFA No. 100478 of 2018 xii. The Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) and the Respondent shall bear the costs of the litigation on their own. 5. The Appellants No.1(a) to 1(d) and Respondent submit that, this compromise is binding on all the parties, their legal heirs and the persons representing or claiming through them. 6. The contents of this compromise petition have been read over to the parties and the parties have entered into this compromise out of their free will and wish and without any coercion, or undue influence. WHEREFORE, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to modify the judgment and decree dated 13.07.2018 passed in OS No.15/2010 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Karwar, in terms of this compromise petition, in the interests of justice and equity.” The contents of the compromise petition are read over and explained to them, in English language. They accepted the terms and conditions mentioned in the compromise petition and prays to dispose of the appeal in terms of compromise petition. The compromise petition is taken on record. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise petition. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2483-DB RFA No. 100478 of 2018 The office is directed to draw a decree in terms of the compromise petition and refund the court fee as per Section 66 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act., 1958, in favour of appellant No.1(c). Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE HMB LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 10