- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53298 RSA No. 356 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 356 OF 2014 (INJ) BETWEEN: 1. SMT JAYAMMA W/O CHIKKAIAH AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 2. BORAIAH @ ANANDA S/O CHIKKAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS 3. ANDANI S/O CHIKKAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS THE APPELLANT NOS.1 to 3 ARE R/O HOLALU VILLAGE DUDDA HOBLI MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571401 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. PRAMOD R, ADV.) AND: Digitally signed by SHILPABAI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53298 RSA No. 356 of 2014 1. CHIKKAMMA W/O BOCHAIAH AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS 2. ANDANI S/O BOCHAIAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 2(A) SMT. SHIVAMMA W/O LATE ANDANI AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/O HOLALU VILLAGE MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571436 2(B) ABHISHEK S/O LATE ANDANI AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS R/O HOLALU VILLAGE MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571436 2(C) HARSHITHA D/O LATE ANDANI AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/O HOLALU VILLAGE MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571436 2(D) JAYARAMU S/O BOCHAIAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/O HOLALU VILLAGE MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571436 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53298 RSA No. 356 of 2014 3. JAYARAMU S/O BOCHAIAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3 ARE R/O HOLALU VILLAGE DUDDA HOBLI MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571401 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.C.SHIVARAMU, ADV.) RSA FILED U/S.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD 26.11.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO.28/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE & C.C. OF FAST TRACK COURT, MANDYA, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD 15.12.2006 PASSED IN OS.NO.120/2000 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) & JMFC., MANDYA. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSIONW, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53298 RSA No. 356 of 2014 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT The appellants, respondent No.1, legal representatives of deceased respondent No.2 and respondent No.3 are present before the Court, and they are identified by their respective counsel. 2. The parties to the appeal have filed a compromise petition, which reads as follows: "The appellant Nos.1 to 3 have filed a suit in OS No.120/2000 before the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC at Mandya for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction with respect to suit property i.e., house property situated at Holalu Village, Dudda Hobli, Mandya Taluk, bearing Sy.No.1148 and property No.946/C measuring East to west 17' and North to South 16' a country tiled residential house bounded on the: East by : Galli and then the house of Vaikuntaswamy West by : House of Siddaramu and Kempamma North by : Residential house portion belonging to the defendants South by : Street - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53298 RSA No. 356 of 2014 The said suit came to be dismissed on 15.12.2006. Against the judgment and decree passed in OS No.120/2000, the appellant Nos.1 to 3 herein have filed Regular Appeal No.28/2010 before the Fast Track Court I, Mandya. The said appeal also came to be dismissed by the First Appellate Court by its judgment dated 26.11.2013 confirming the judgment and decree passed In OS No.120/2000. Against the above two judgments, the appellant Nos. 1 to 3 preferred the present RSA No.356/2024 before this Hon'ble Court. 2.On the advice of the well-wisher and the elders, this Regular Second Appeal No.356/2014 has been settled between the appellant Nos. 1 to 3 and the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to the following terms: a) The appellant Nos. 1 Smt.Jayamma is the wife of Chikkalah, the appellant Nos.2 and 3 are the sons of Chikkaiah. The father of the respondent No.2 Bochaiah and Chikkaiah are the brothers. The appellant Nos.1 to 3 belongs to the family of Chikkaiah and the respondent Nos.1 to 3 belongs to the family of Bochaiah. b) The appellant Nos.1 to 3 herein have agreed to give up their right and interest and ownership over the suit schedule house property situated at Holalu Village, Dudda Hobli, Mandya Taluk bearing Sy.No.1148 and property No.946/C measuring East to West 17 feet and North to South 16 feet a country tiled residential house bounded on the: East by : Galli and then the house of Vaikuntaswamy West by : House of Siddaramu and Kempamma North by : Residential house portion belonging to the defendants South by : Street - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53298 RSA No. 356 of 2014 to the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 herein and the appellant Nos.1 to 3 or anybody on their behalf will not claim any right over the said schedule house property herein, afterwards the respondent Nos.1 to 3 are the absolute owners of the above said property and these appellant Nos.1 to 3 will not claim any right over the said house property. c) The land in Sy.No.118/8 totally measures 5 guntas situated at Holalu Village, Dudda Hobli, Mandya Taluk, Mandya District which is standing in the name of late Kariyaiah, father of the first respondent husband. Out of which, the appellant Nos. 1 to 3 have been in possession and enjoyment of 2 1½ guntas of land and the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are in possession and enjoyment of another two guntas of land. The said Sy.No.118/8 has been numbered as 118/8P1 on the strength of the alleged Settlement Deed dated 11.02.1980 said to have been executed by her husband Chikkaiah. Notwithstanding the alleged Settlement Deed dated 11.02.1980 both the parties herein voluntarily without any undue influence or conversion, etc., agreed herein that they will not claim any right or interest or ownership over the entire property and also agreed that the appellant Nos. 1 to 3 and also agreed that the husband of the respondent No.1 is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of land in Sy.No.118/8P1 bounded on the: East by : Nale West by : Chikkanna North by : Shankar South by : Road situated towards eastern side of the remaining property d) The appellant Nos.1 to 3 or anybody from their side agreed that they will not claim any right, interest or ownership in respect of the land in Sy. No.118/8B in the name of late Kariyaiah, S/o. Thopi Putta who is the grandfather of respondent Nos. 2 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53298 RSA No. 356 of 2014 and 3 and the appellant Nos.2 and 3 also claims to be the grandchildren of Kariyaiah to an extent of 2 1/2 guntas bounded on the: East by : Jayamma West by : Nale North by : Shankar South by : Road situated towards western side of property fallen to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 thereby both the appellants and the respondents are entitled to enjoy the aforesaid extent of land in the aforesaid Sy.Nos. and each of them have no grievance against each other in respect of the aforesaid extent of land agreed in the compromise. e) Apart from the above, the appellant Nos.1 to 3 and the respondent Nos.1 to 3 have not any rival claim between them. f) This compromise entered between the parties out of their own volition, without any undue influence and with their free consent and the terms of the compromise is read over and explained in Kannada language known to both of us and thereafter affixed the signature. In view of the above compromise arrived at both are at liberty to get the change of katha before the competent authority in their respective names. WHEREFORE, the appellant Nos.1 to 3 and the respondent Nos.1, 2(a) to (c) and 3 pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to record the compromise and decree the suit of parties as per the terms of compromise, in the interest of justice and equity." - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53298 RSA No. 356 of 2014 3. The contents of the compromise petition are read over, and explained to the parties in Kannada language known to them. They have understood and accepted the terms and conditions of the compromise petition, and accordingly, prays to dispose of the instant appeal in terms of the compromise petition. 4. Perused the compromise petition, and I am satisfied that the terms and conditions of the compromise petition are lawful. 5. In the circumstances, I do not find any legal impediment to accept the compromise arrived at between the parties, and to dispose of this appeal in terms of compromise. 6. The compromise petition is taken on record. 7. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53298 RSA No. 356 of 2014 ORDER (i) This Regular Second Appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise petition. (ii) The Registry is directed to draw a decree in terms of the compromise petition. (iii) In view of the disposal of the appeal, pending interlocutory applications, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SSB