- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20020 RFA No. 340 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 480 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 340 OF 2016 (DEC-) C/W REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 480 OF 2016 IN RFA No. 340/2016 BETWEEN: SRI M DEVARAJU S/O LATE N.G.MALLA REDDY AGED 55 YEARS, R/AT. 68/14, SRI GOWRI COMPLEX, 20TH MAIN, MHBCS, BTM 1ST STAGE, BANGALORE-560 029 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RANGARAMU V.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI R PARASURAMAN S/O LATE D.RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 2. SMT. R.KALPANA W/O R.PARASURAMAN AGE ABOUT 44 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.360/5, NETHRAVATHI BLOCK, NANDI ENCLAVE, BANASHANKAR 3RD STAGE, Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20020 RFA No. 340 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 480 of 2016 BANGALORE-560085 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NARAYANA S, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS RFA IS FILED U/S. 96(1) OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.12.2015 PASSED IN OS NO.854/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGLAURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU ETC., IN RFA NO. 480/2016 BETWEEN: SRI. M DEVARAJU S/O LATE N.G.MALLA REDDY AGED 55 YEARS, R./AT 68/14, SRI GOWRI COMPELX 20TH MAIN, MHBCS BTM 1ST STAGE, BANGALORE-560 029 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. RANGARAMU V.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI R PARASURAMAN S/O LATE D. RAMACHANDRAN AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 2. SMT. R.KALPANA W/O R.PARASURAMAN AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.3605, NETHRAVATHI BLOCK, NANDI ENCLAVE, BANASHANKARI 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE-560085. S. VENKATARAMAN - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20020 RFA No. 340 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 480 of 2016 3. SINCE DECEASED OF HIS LR'S SMT. B. MEENALOCHANI W/O LATE S.VENKATARAMAN AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/AT NO.23 (OLD NO.9) 17TH CROSS, LAKSHMIPURAM ULSOOR, BANGALORU-560 008 NOW PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.2 LEONIE HILL ROAD NO.21, 02, SINGAPOR-92. 4. SRI.BALASUBRAMANYAN VENKATARAMAN S/O LATE VENKATARAMAN AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, NOW PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.2 LEONIE HILL ROAD NO.21, 02 SINGAPOR-92. 5. SRI CHANDRASEKARAN VENKATARAN S/O LATE S.VENKATARAMAN AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NO.96, CROWN ROYAL DRIVE WILLIAMSVILLE NEW YORK (U.S.A.)-14221. 6. SMT.VIJAYALAKSHMI ISWARA D/O LATE S.VENKATARAMAN AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.709, WOODLAND AVENUE, PLAINFIELD NEW JERSY (U.S.A.-07062). 7. SMT. VIMALA W/O SRI.BALARAM NAIDU R/AT NO.36, KATPADI GUDIYATTAM, TALUK VELLUR DISTRICT TAMILNADU STATE. ...RESPONDENTS - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20020 RFA No. 340 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 480 of 2016 (BY SRI. NARAYANA S FOR C/R1 & R2.,ADVOCATE V/O DATED: 13.04.2016 R3 TO R7 ARE DELETED) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96(1) OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.12.2015 PASSED IN O.S NO.1202/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU AND ETC., THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The lis pertains to the ownership of the suit schedule property. The trial Court has decreed that respondent Nos.1 and 2 (plaintiffs in O.S.No.1202/2008) are the owners of the suit schedule property. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant has filed the aforementioned appeals. 2. Today, the appellant and respondent Nos.1 and 2 have filed a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, wherein the appellant has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore only) to respondent Nos.1 and 2 and in turn respondent Nos.1 and 2 are giving up their right, title and interest in the suit schedule property in favour of the appellant. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20020 RFA No. 340 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 480 of 2016 3. The compromise petition is taken on record. 4. The appellant and respondent Nos.1 and 2 (they are same persons in both the cases) are present before the Court and are duly identified by their respective advocates. They pray that the appeals may be disposed of in terms of the compromise petition. Hence, the following:- ORDER i. Both the appeals stand disposed of in terms of the compromise petition dated 09.04.2026 filed by the appellant and respondent Nos.1 and 2. ii. The judgment and decree passed by the trial Court in O.S.Nos.1202/2008 C/w 854/2009 stands modified in terms of the compromise petition. iii. Registry is directed to draw a decree accordingly. iv. The TCRs shall be returned back to the trial Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20020 RFA No. 340 of 2016 C/W RFA No. 480 of 2016 v. If the parties are entitled to refund of Court fee, the Registry shall verify the same and refund the same to the parties in the light of the compromise. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE VMB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5