1 HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, BENGALURU BEFORE THE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 CONCILIATORS PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV & SRI. A. CHANDRACHUD, MEMBER WP NO. 26916 OF 2023 (Lok Adalat No.8592/2025) BETWEEN 1 . SRI. H.P. LAKSHMANA REDDY S/O LATE CHIKKAPAPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 197, 11TH CROSS, 18TH MAIN, 4TH SECTOR, HSR LAYOUT, BANGALORE 560102. 2 . SMT. S R MANJULAMMA W/O LATE CHIKKAPAPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 197, 11TH CROSS, 18TH MAIN, 4TH SECTOR, HSR LAYOUT, BANGALORE 560102. 3 . SRI SURENDRANATH S/O LATE CHIKKAPAPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 197, 11TH CROSS, 18TH MAIN, 4TH SECTOR, HSR LAYOUT, BANGALORE 560102. 2 4 . DR. MATHURA BABU S/O LATE CHIKKAPAPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 3833, ELIZABETH COURT, NEWBURG, INDIANA , USA, REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER SIR H P LAKSHMANA REDDY. ...PETITIONERS (BY SMT. RAJESHWARI M, ADVOCATE FOR P1 TO P3 ) AND 1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING, BANGALORE 560001 2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BEERASANDRA VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, PIN CODE 562110. 3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DODDABALLAPURA SUB DIVISION, TUBAGERE DODDABALLAPURA ROAD, DODDABALLAPURA PIN CODE 561203. 4 . THE TAHSILDAR HOSAKOTE TALUK, HOSAKOTE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, PIN CODE 562129. 3 5 . SMT. S N RATHNAMMA W/O LATE H P KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 43, NEW MUNICIPAL NO 262/43, 5TH MAIN ROAD, 4TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE 560011. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. D V VENKATESH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-5) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R2 DATED 02/11/2023 IN R.P. NO. 162/2023, AS PER ANNEXURE-H AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORDER IS PASSED. CONCILIATION ORDER The present petition has been filed seeking to set aside the order passed by the second respondent in R.P.No.162/2023 dated 02.11.2023 at Annexure-H. 2. The parties have entered into settlement as per the joint memo filed. 3. The terms of settlement including the condition inserted at para 10 reads as follows: "The parties to the above petition submits as follows: 4 1) The petitioners No.1 to 4 and 5th respondent in the above case have jointly agreed to resolve their dispute amicably among themselves is as follows; 2) The respondent No.5 had filed a suit for partition against the petitioners No.1, 2, 3 and 4 herein for the relief of partition in OS No.6636/2018 (between the family members and the said suit was ended up in a Compromise petition Dated: 31-10-2018) and in-view of the compromise petition final decree was drawn. 3) The petitioners No. 1 to 4 and 5th Respondent have submitted the final decree allotted to their respective shares to the Revenue Department i.e.. Tahasildar to make necessary entries as per the Final Decree. 4) The petitioners submits that, in-view of the application filed to effect the mutation in their respective names i.e. Before the Tahasildar, the Tahasildar got effected the revenue records in the name of petitioners herein by changing the names in column No. 9 and 12. 5) The 5th respondent herein aggrieved by the MR H- 55/2018-19 has filed the appeal before the 4th Respondent/Tahasildar in (RAH) No. 764/2022, and the said appeal was also dismissed as against which the 5th respondent herein filed the RP No. 162/2023, and the said appeal was allowed by the 3rd Respondent in RP No. 162/2023, Dated: 31-02-2023, as against the order 5 passed by the 3rd Respondent as against which the 5th Respondent preferred R.P No. 162/2023, before the 2nd Respondent. The after hearing the parties the 5TH Respondent was pleased to dispose of the Revision Petition and remanded back to the Tahasildar Dated: 02-11-2023, 6) The petitioners No. 1 to 4 and 5th Respondent submits that, as per the Compromise petition before the Civil Court in OS No. 6636/2018, both the parties had agreed to divide the Sy. No. 101/3, totally measuring 4 Acre 20 Guntas into two units which is as follows: a) Sy. No. 101/3 was allotted to Sri.H.P.Lakshmana Reddy vide item No. 21 in Compromise petition in OS No. 6636/2018. measuring 2 Acres 0.8 Guntas including 0.32 guntas Karab. b) Sy. No. 101/3 was allotted to Smt. S.N. Rathnamma vide item No. 15 in Compromise petition in OS No. 6636/2018. measuring 2 Acres 12 Guntas including 0.34 guntas Karab. 7) And therefore, the entire extent of 4 Acres 20 Guntas was divided between the petitioners and the 5th respondent herein in the compromise petition which was filed before the City Civil Court in OS No. 6636/2018, and now both the parties accept the compromise petitions and accordingly the parties wants to put an end to the litigation 6 to have a peaceful ending and hence the above Joint Memo is now being filed before this Hon'ble Court. 8) The Respondent accepts the order passed by the Civil Court in OS No. 6636/2018, as per the Compromise petition along with the sketch. And further that, the 5th Respondent has filed the compromise petition along with the sketch before the DC i.e, 2nd Respondent. Wherein it was divided as per the sketch and the Compromise i.e, a) Sri.H.P. Lakshman Reddy was allotted to 2-08 Guntas (32 Guntas of Karab and 1 Acre 16 Guntas cultivable land) b) Smt. S.N.Rathnamma, was allotted to 2.12 Guntas (34 Guntas Karab and 1 Acre 18 Guntas cultivable land). Therefore, both the parties have voluntarily agreed to act as per the above mentioned compromise petition and to divide their share as mentioned above and further that, both the parties prays that, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue directions to the Revenue Authorities ie. Respondent No. 4 to enter their names in the Revenue Records as per the Joint-Memo. 9) Both the parties mutually agree that, both the parties will co-operate to each other for changing the MR/Revenue Entries before the respective authorities and the said Joint Memo has been signed by the parties voluntarily without 7 any threat or coercion and affixed their respective signatures with full knowledge and consequence. 10) Respondent Nos.1 to 4 reserves the Right to challenge any terms of the compromise which is detrimental to the state government. The revenue department has the Right to consider in accordance with Law. In respect of Phodi and RTC including extracts of entries. 4. In light of the settlement arrived at in between the parties, the order at Annexure-H is set aside. The revenue entries and other reliefs sought for would be in terms of the compromise. In case of unreasonable delay in concluding the proceedings, the parties are at liberty to move this court by filing appropriate application. 5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER NP