- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37885 RSA No. 1109 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1109 OF 2021 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. R MALA W/O LATE MAHADEVA @ M MADEVA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, 2. HEMALATHA D/O LATE MAHADEVA @ M MADEVA, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 3. AMRUTHA D/O LATE MAHADEVA @ M MADEVA, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, MINOR REP. BY MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. R MALA, ALL ARE RESIDING AT CHANNIPURADAMOLE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK - 571 313. …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. SUMATHI S, ADVOCATE) AND: MAHADEVA S/O LATE MANASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHANNIPURADAMOLE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHAMARAJANAGAR - 571 313 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P. MAHESHA, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.09.2019 PASSED IN RA.NO.118/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AND JMFC., CHAMARAJANAGARA, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.07.2017 PASSED IN OS.NO. 247/2011 ON THE FILE Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37885 RSA No. 1109 of 2021 OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., CHAMARAJANAGAR. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER A memo is filed by learned counsel for the appellants. Memo reads as under: “The appellants respectfully submit that the parties have filed compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC in Ex-27/2017 on the file of Addl., Civil Judge and JMFC, Chamarajanagar on 22.11.2024. The Executing Court is proceeding with the petition in order to comply with the terms of the compromise petition. The copy of the order dated 22.11.2024 recording the compromise from the official website of the Trial Court and office copy of the compromise petition filed by the parties are herewith annexed with this memo, for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court. Hence this Hon’nle Court may be pleased to dispose the above appeal as settled before the Trial Court and pass suitable orders for refund of the court fees paid by the appellants in the above appeal in name of the 1st appellant, in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Placing the memo on record, appeal is dismissed as it has rendered infructuous. 3. Permissible refund of Court fee is allowed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46/CT: BHK