- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29757 RSA No. 878 of 2022 C/W RSA No. 908 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 878 OF 2022 (POS) C/W REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 908 OF 2022 IN RSA No. 878/2022 BETWEEN: 1. ANEES SULTHANA W/O SHABEER AHMED, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 2. SHABBIR AHMED S/O ABDUL MAJEED, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, 2(A) AYESHA SHIDDIQHA, D/O LATE SHABEER AHMED, W/O LATE NAZEER AHMED, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 2(B) AKBAR AHMED KHAN, S/O LATE.SHABEER AHMED, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 2(C) SALEEM KHAN, S/O LATE. SHABEER AHMED, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. 2(D)MOHAMMED RAFI, S/O LATE. SHABEER AHMED, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29757 RSA No. 878 of 2022 C/W RSA No. 908 of 2022 2(A) TO 2(D) ALL ARE R/AT D.NO.1941, 6TH CROSS, 1ST STAGE, RAJEEV NAGAR, N.R.MOHALLA, MYSURU 570 019. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NANJUNDA SWAMY N.,ADVOCATE) AND: MUBEEN SULTANA W/O DR.RAFI AHMED, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/AT NO.432, 1ST STAE, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB, MYSURU 570008. REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER, SRI.SAYYAD NASRULLA, S/O SAYED AMEER, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT D.NO.3074, GOOD SHEPERED CONVENT ROAD, LASHKAR MOHALLA, MYSURU 570001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SYED AMEER.,ADVOCATE) THIS RSA FILED UNDER SECTION 100 R/W ORDER 42 RULE 1 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.04.2022 PASSED IN RA.No.211/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MYSURU, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 06.09.2018 PASSED IN OS No.682/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE C/c I ADDITIONAL I CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MYSURU. IN RSA NO. 908/2022 BETWEEN: SMT ANEES SULTHANA W/O SHABEER AHMED - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29757 RSA No. 878 of 2022 C/W RSA No. 908 of 2022 R/AT D.NO. 1941, 6th CROSS, 1st STAGE, RAJEEV NAGAR N.R. MOHALLA MYSURU- 570 007 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. NANJUNDA SWAMY N.,ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. MUBEEN SULTANA W/O DR. RAFI AHMED REP BY GPA HOLDER SRI. SAYYAD NASRULLA S/O SAYED AMEER, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT D.NO. 3074 GOOD SHEPERED CONVENT ROAD, LASHKAR MOHALLA MYSURU- 570 000 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SYEED AMEER., ADVOCATE) THIS RSA FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.04.2022 PASSED IN RA.NO. 448/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MYSURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 06.09.2018 PASSED IN OS.NO. 51/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE C/C I ADDITIONAL I CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MYSURU. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29757 RSA No. 878 of 2022 C/W RSA No. 908 of 2022 ORAL JUDGMENT The parties are present with their respective advocates. 2. A compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC, 1908 is filed. The contents of the compromise petition are explained to the parties in their own language by respondent counsel by Sri. Syed Ameer. They confirm that the contents of the compromise depict true terms of settlement and there is no force or undue influence or coercion in reaching the compromise. 3. It is also submitted by both the advocates that children of first appellant are living elsewhere and they are not in possession of the property and it is only the first appellant who is in possession of the property after demise of the second appellant who is her husband. As such she has signed the compromise petition on behalf of all the LRs of the second appellant who is none other than her own children. She is vacating the property by taking amount of Rs.6,00,000/-, interest of other legal - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29757 RSA No. 878 of 2022 C/W RSA No. 908 of 2022 representatives of second appellant is also settled in in toto these appeals. 4. Sri. Syed Ameer representing the respondent who is the owner of the property is agreeable for the same. 5. Accordingly, there is no impediment for this court to accept the compromise petition and dispose of both the appeals in terms of the compromise petition. 6. Pursuant to the compromise terms, a cheque dated 10.08.2025 in a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh) only is tendered by the respondent to the appellant. The same is acknowledged in the order sheet. Balance amount is Rs.3,00,000/-, which would be paid to the respondent by the appellant at the time of vacating the property. 7. It is made clear that since the first appellant has voluntarily stated that her children are not occupying the property and it is in her exclusive possession, no other - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29757 RSA No. 878 of 2022 C/W RSA No. 908 of 2022 claim in respect of the possession of the property by anybody claiming under the first appellant shall be entertained in any further litigation. 8. Hence, the following:- ORDER 1) Both the appeals stand disposed of in terms of the compromise petition. 2) Office is directed to draw appropriate decree in terms of the compromise petition appending the copy of the compromise petition as part of the decree. 3) The original title deeds which are produced and marked as the exhibits is entitled to be taken back by the respondent on due identification. 4) In view of the settlement, permissible refund of court fee in the suit/s and both the appeals are allowed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE BSV/List No.: 2 Sl No.: 76