Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 82410 (KAR)

SRI. KALLESHAPPA v. SMT. YASHODAMMA

RSA/1526/2023 · 2025-07-23

H P Sandesh

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28177 RSA No. 1526 of 2023 C/W RSA No. 1750 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1526 OF 2023 (PAR) C/W REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1750 OF 2022 (PAR) IN RSA No.1526/2023: BETWEEN: 1. SRI. KALLESHAPPA S/O LATE BOMMANNA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/O SOORAPURA VILLAGE (WRONGLY MENTIONED BY THE PLAINTIFF IN APPEAL MEMO AS SOORANAPURA VILLAGE) YAGATI HOBLI, KADUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU – 577548. 2. SRI. YASHAVANTHA S/O SRI KALLESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/O SOORAPURA VILLAGE (WRONGLY MENTIONED BY THE PLAINTIFF IN APPEAL MEMO) YAGATI HOBLI, KADUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU – 577548 3. SMT. KAMALAMMA W/O SRI KALLESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/O SOORAPURA VILLAGE (WRONGLY MENTIONED BY THE PLAINTIFF IN APPEAL Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28177 RSA No. 1526 of 2023 C/W RSA No. 1750 of 2022 MEMO AS SOORANAPURA VILLAGE) YAGATI HOBLI, KADUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577548 …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. VIJETHA R. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. YASHODAMMA W/O SRI HALASIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O SOORAPURA VILLAGE (WRONGLY MENTIONED BY THE PLAINTIFF IN APPEAL MEMO AS SOORANAPURA VILLAGE) YAGATI HOBLI, KADUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577548 …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. APEKSHA D., ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.09.2022 PASSED IN R.A.NO.6/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE (DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE), FAMILY COURT, CHIKKAMAGALURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.07.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.18/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KADUR. IN RSA NO.1750/2022: BETWEEN: 1. SMT. YASHODAMMA W/O HALASIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/O SOORANAPURA VILLAGE YAGATI HOBI, KADUR TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT ...APPELLANT (BY SMT. APEKSHA D., ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28177 RSA No. 1526 of 2023 C/W RSA No. 1750 of 2022 AND: 1. SRI KALLESHAPPA S/O LATE BOMMANNA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 2. SRI. YASHAVANTHA S/O KALLESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS 3. SMT. KAMALAMMA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS W/O KALLESHAPPA ALL R/O SOORANAPURA VILLAGE YAGATI HOBI, KADUR TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT ...RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. VIJETHA R. NAIK, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.09.2022 PASSED IN R.A.NO.6/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE (DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE) FAMILY CURT, CHIKKAMAGALURU . DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.07.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.18/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDE, KADUR. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28177 RSA No. 1526 of 2023 C/W RSA No. 1750 of 2022 ORAL JUDGMENT The parties along with their respective counsels are present before the Court. 2. The respective parties have filed a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC. In terms of the compromise arrived between the parties, the respondent in R.S.A.No.1526/2023 and the appellant in R.S.A.No.1750/2022 has agreed to execute relinquishment deed in favour of the appellants in R.S.A.No.1526/2023 and the respondents in R.S.A.No.1750/2022 in view of 100 grams gold already given in favour of the respondent in R.S.A.No.1526/2023 and appellant in R.S.A.No.1750/2022 and except these terms, there are no other grounds. 3. The parties have also accepted the terms of compromise. Hence, compromise petition is taken on record. Accordingly, both the appeals are disposed of in terms of the compromises. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28177 RSA No. 1526 of 2023 C/W RSA No. 1750 of 2022 4. In terms of the compromise, registry is directed to draw the decree accordingly. 5. In view of disposal of the main appeal, I.A. if any, in both the appellants, does not survive for consideration and the same stands dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22