- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15075 RFA No. 1567 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1567 OF 2025 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI RAMESH S/O B. MUNI LINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT NO.77, GUDDADAHALLI, 1ST MAIN ROAD, R.T. NAGAR POST, HEBBAL, BANGALORE-560032 2. SHRI. JAGADISH KUMAR S/O L. MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NO.104, GUDDADAHALLI, 1ST MAIN ROAD, R.T. NAGAR POST, HEBBAL, BANGALORE-560032 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NATARAJU T., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI ANJANA MURTHY S/O LATE RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT NO.128, GUDDADAHALLI, R.T. NAGAR POST, VISHWANATHA NAGANAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560032 2. SMT. PUSHPAVATHI S W/O LATE MARUTHI R, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT NO.130, 2ND CROSS, 2ND MAIN, 1ST STAGE, KHB COLONY, Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15075 RFA No. 1567 of 2025 BASAVESHWARA NAGARA, BENGALURU-560079 3. KUMARI MONICASHREE M D/O LATE MARUTHI R, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.130, 2ND CROSS, 2ND MAIN, 1ST STAGE, KHB COLONY, BASAVESHWARA NAGARA, BENGALURU-560079 4. SHRI. MANJUNATH S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO. 125, NAGENAHALLI MAIN ROAD, GUDDADAHALLI VILLAGE, R T NAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560032 5. SHRI VINOD KUMAR S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT NO. 125, NAGENAHALLI MAIN ROAD, GUDDADAHALLI VILLAGE, R.T. NAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560032 6. SHRI SHANKARA S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.125, NAGENAHALLI MAIN ROAD, GUDDADAHALLI VILLAGE, R.T. NAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560032 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. VISWANATHY SETTY, ADVOCATE) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.04.2025 PASSED IN OS.NO.4975/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15075 RFA No. 1567 of 2025 AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND INJUNCTION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 22.04.2025 passed by the XX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-32), Bengaluru in O.S No.4975/2016. 2. This appeal was referred for mediation, where the parties have settled the dispute and they have filed a memorandum of settlement under Section 89 of CPC read with Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005, the relevant terms of which reads as follows: "I. The appellants have filed the above Appeal against the respondent against the judgment and decree dated 22.04.2025 passed in O.S. No. 4975/2016 on the file of the XX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH:32), to set aside the said Order. II. The aforesaid appeal was referred to mediation for resolving the dispute between the parties. In the course of mediation, the appellants and the respondents along with their respective counsels were present, identified each other and they have resolved - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15075 RFA No. 1567 of 2025 their dispute and have agreed to the following terms and conditions:- 1. The appellants / the defendant No.4 and 5 and the respondent No.4 / defendant No.1 agreed that as held by the Hon'ble Trial Court the 'C' schedule property to the suit in O.S.No.4975/2016 is a common passage / road to both the respondent No.1 to 3 / plaintiff No.1, 2(a) and 2(b) and the appellants who are the defendant No.4 and 5 and their family members and that all the respondents hereby agree, admit confirm that the 'C' schedule property is a common access road / passage to the respondent No. 1 to 6 and all their family members. 2. The appellants / defendant No.4 and 5 declare that they have no any manner of right, title, interest or any claim over the 'C' schedule property to the plaint and further declare that the 'C' schedule property is a common passage / road to the respondent No.1 to 6 for utilization of the same as common road to reach their respective houses. 3. The appellants / defendant No.4 and 5 hereby declare and admit that they have no objection to confirm the Judgment and Decree passed by the Hon'ble Trial Court holding that the sale deed date 11.05.2016 executed by the respondent No.4 to 6/ defendant No.1 to 3 in favour of the appellants / the defendant No.4 and 5 in respect of a portion of 'C' schedule property measuring East to West 10 ft. and North to South 19 ft., which is registered in the office - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15075 RFA No. 1567 of 2025 of the Sub-Registrar, Hebbala vide Document No.HBB- 1-00475-2016-17 as void document and to cancel the same. The draft/cost of cancelation of the sale deed will be borne by the respondent. 4. The appellants / defendant No.4 and 5 have agreed that they are ready to execute a Cancellation of the registered Sale Deed dated 1105.2016, which is registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Hebbala as Document No HBB-1-00475-2016-17 by cancelling the same and to co-operate with the respondent No.1 to 3 for getting cancellation of the same to avoid future complications. 5. The appellants / defendant No.4 and 5 hereby declare that herein afterwards they will not make any claim over the suit 'C' schedule property on the basis of the registered sale deed dt.11.05.2016, in the event if the appellants and the respondent No.4 to 6 failed to execute the cancellation of the registered sale deed, the respondent No.1 to 3 / plaintiff No.1, 2(a) and 2(b) are at liberty to execute the decree that would be passed by this Hon'ble Court and to get the cancellation of the registered sale deed dt.11.05.2016. 6. The respondent Nos.4, 5 and 6 are voluntarily undertakes to appear before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka to file the vakalath through their concerned advocates. 7. The respondent No.1, 2 and 3 have agreed to pay Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty thousand - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15075 RFA No. 1567 of 2025 only) as full and final settlement against the claim of the appellants by way of demand draft within one month from the date of this agreement. In turn the appellants have no objection to confirm the decree in O.S.No.4975/2016. 8. The respondent No.1 and 3 have voluntarily agreed to pay the said amount to the appellants towards the consideration amount paid by them to the respondent No. 4 to 6. 9. Apart from the above, they have no other claims against each other." 3. In view of the above, this appeal stands disposed of in terms of the memorandum of settlement. 4. Office is directed to draw a decree in terms of the settlement. The Court fee shall be refunded as per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of High Court of Judicature at Madras v. M.C.Subramaniam (AIR 2021 SC 2662). Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16