Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15071 (KAR)

SMT SUSHEELAMMA v. SRI RAJAIAH

RSA/299/2010 · 2026-04-15

V Srishananda

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20547 RSA No. 299 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.299 OF 2010 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SUSHEELAMMA W/O. LATE SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 2. SRI KUMARA S. S/O. LATE SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 3. SMT. GEETHA D/O. LATE SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 4. SRI PRASANNA S/O. LATE SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT SUNKA THONNUR VILLAGE CHINAKURALI HOBLI PANDAVAPURA TALUK-571 431 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI PAVAN KUMAR S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI M. N. MADHUSUDHAN, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI RAJAIAH S/O. LATE KAPANAIAH Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20547 RSA No. 299 of 2010 MAJOR AGE NOT KNOWN R/AT SUNKA THONNUR VILLAGE CHINAKURALI HOBLI PANDAVAPURA TALUK-571 431 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI LOKESH D. K., ADVOCATE FOR SRI K. SRIRAM, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.10.2009 PASSED IN RA.NO.33/2009 (OLD 9/2007) ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) & JMFC., PANDAVAPURA, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.11.2006 PASSED IN OS.NO.13/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) & JMFC., PANDAVAPURA. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT Appeal came to be admitted to consider the following substantial question of law. “Whether Ex.D.3 creates right in favour of the defendant to resist the case of the plaintiffs for partition?” 2. During the course of hearing, settlement proposal was mooted by this Court having regard to the nature of the dispute - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20547 RSA No. 299 of 2010 and substantial question of law raised at the time of admission of the appeal. 3. Pursuant to such proposal, parties have agreed to settle the dispute amicably and they have presented a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Contents of the same are extracted hereunder: “The Appellants and the Respondent above named most respectfully submit as follows: 1. The Appellants and the Respondent submits that with the intervention of elders, well-wishers, and family friends, the parties to the above appeal have agreed to settle their disputes amicably. The parties have voluntarily agreed to enter this compromise petition and the same is reduced in writing in respect of their settlement. 2. The Appellants and the Respondent submits that the 'Appellants have filed a suit for the relief of partition and separate possession against the Respondent herein in O.S.No.13/2002 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) & JMFC, Pandavapura sought for half share in the suit schedule property. The said suit came to be decreed on 18/11/2006 declaring that the Appellants are entitle to half share and the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20547 RSA No. 299 of 2010 Respondent is entitled to the remaining half share in the suit schedule property by metes and bounds. 3. The Appellants and the Respondent submits that Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the Respondent preferred R.A. No.33/2009 before the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & JMFC, Pandavapura. The First Appellate Court, by its judgment dated 27/10/2009, allowed the appeal thereby set aside the judgment and decree dated 18/11/2005 passed in O.S.No.13/2002 and dismissed the suit. Challenging the same, the Appellants have preferred the present appeal before this Hon'ble Court. 4. The Appellants and the Respondent submits that during the pendency of the above appeal, the parties to this appeal have amicably settled the dispute among themselves and according to the terms of compromise the parties to the above appeal are agreed to divide their respective shares on the suit schedule 'A' property which is scheduled hereunder and further they have agreed to take their respective shares as mentioned herein: a. The Appellants have agreed to take half share in the schedule A property which is described as Schedule 'B' Property in the schedule column. b. The Respondent has agreed to take half share in the schedule A property which is described as Schedule 'C' Property in the schedule column. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20547 RSA No. 299 of 2010 5. The Appellants and the Respondent further agreed that between the parties that:- • Both parties shall have no claim whatsoever against each other in respect of their respectable shares allotted among themselves and the same are shown in the schedule column. • The parties shall maintain cordial family relationship hereinafter entering this deed of compromise. 6. It is agreed that both parties shall have no objection for effecting khatha and other related documents of ownership in respect of their respectable shares before the concerned authorities. 7. It is further agreed that each party shall hereinafter enjoy their respective allotted share hereinafter without any interference and they agreed to enjoy peacefully. 8. The Appellants and the Respondent submits that, by virtue of this compromise, the parties have agreed to modify the judgment and decree passed in R.A. No.33/2009 and enters this compromise deed and the same may be recorded and a decree has to be passed by this Hon'ble Court in terms of this compromise deed. 9. The Appellants and the Respondent submits that this compromise is entered into voluntarily, without any - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20547 RSA No. 299 of 2010 force, coercion, undue influence, or misrepresentation and in view of the same the above compromise petition may accepted by the hands of this Hon'ble Court. 10.The Appellants and the Respondent submits that if the above compromise petition is not allowed, the appellants as well as respondent will be put to great hardship and hence it is just and necessary to allow the above compromise petition from the hands of this Hon'ble Court. PRAYER WHEREFORE, the Appellants and the Respondent respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to: a) Record this compromise under Order XXIII Rule 3 R/w Sec 151 of CPC. b) Dispose of the above appeal in terms of this compromise petition. c) Pass a decree in accordance with the compromise petition in the interest justice and equity. SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTY- SCHEDULE-A All that part and parcel of the House property bearing assessment No.38/26 measuring East to West: 25 feet and North to South: 47 feet situated at Sunkathonnur Village, Melukote Hobli, Pandavapura Taluk bounded on: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20547 RSA No. 299 of 2010 East by : Land of Puttaswamaiah West by : Road North by : Road South by : Land of Boraiah SCHEDULE 'B' PROPERTY (BELONG TO APPELLANTS BY NAME SUSHEELAMMA, KUMARA.S, GEETHA AND PRASANNA) All that part and parcel of the House property bearing assessment No.38/26 measuring East to West: 25 feet and North to South: 23½ feet situated at Sunkathonnur Village, Melukote Hobli, Pandavapura Taluk bounded on:- East by : Land of Puttaswamaiah West by : Road North by : Land of Rajaiah South by : Land of Boraiah SCHEDULE 'C' PROPERTY (BELONG TO RESPONDENT BY NAME RAJAIAH) All that part and parcel of the House property bearing assessment No.38/26 measuring East to West: 25 feet and North to South: 23½ feet situated at Sunkathonnur Village, Melukote Hobli, Pandavapura Taluk bounded on:- East by : Land of Puttaswamaiah West by : Road North by : Road South by : Land of Susheelamma And others” - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20547 RSA No. 299 of 2010 4. Parties are present before the Court who have subscribed their signatures to the compromise petition. They unequivocally agree that there is no force, undue influence or coercion in reaching out the terms of the compromise petition. 5. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) Placing the compromise petition on record, Appeal stands disposed of answering the substantial question law of law in terms of the compromise petition. (ii) Office is directed to pass a modified decree in terms of the compromise petition appending the copy of the compromise petition as part of the decree. SD/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 2 Sl No.: 80