- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25817 WP No. 18514 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 18514 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. NAGARAPPA DEAD BY HIS LRS, SMT NAGAMMA W/O NAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 2. SRI MURALI S/O LATE NAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS 3. SRI RAMESH S/O LATE NAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 3 ARE R/AT KATTIGENAHALLI VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK 4. SMT SUNITHA W/O MARUTHI A. D/O LATE NAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT BYRATHI VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK - 560 077 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ANIL RAMACHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAMACHANDRA H., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25817 WP No. 18514 of 2024 AND: 1. SRI. NARAYANAPPA S/O LATE MOTAPPA AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS 2. SMT NAGAMMA W/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS 3. SRI KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE MOTAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS 4. SRI MASOOD AHAMED BAIG S/O NAWABJAN AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS R/AT NO.458, MOSQUE ROD, BEGUR ROAD CROSS, BOMMANAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 068 REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER SRI A FERPZ AHMED, S/O AA ZEEZ AHMED, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS. R/AT SY NO 7 AND 8, LINGADHEEAGOLLAHALLI VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK - 562 110 …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT, ORDERS ETC., SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED COMPROMISE DECREE OBTAIN IN F.D.P NO.25/2021 AND SET ASIDE THE CONFIRMATION DEEDS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25817 WP No. 18514 of 2024 DATED 26.09.2019, 11.11.2019, 18.10.2019, 24.10.2019 AND ONE MORE ON 24.10.2019 ANNEXURES-F, F1, F2, F3 AND F4 RESPECTIVELY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. Notice to the respondents is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed. 2. Petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Issue a Writ of certiorari or any other writs, directions, orders etc., set aside the impugned order passed in Misc.No.24/2022 dated 19.02.2024 by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Devanahalli, vide Annexure-H. b. Issue a Writ of certiorari or any other writs, directions, orders etc., and set aside the Confirmation Deeds dated 26.09.2019, 11.11.2019, 18.10.2019, 24.10.2019 and one more on 24.10.2019 Annexures-E, E1, E2, E3 & E4 respectively. c. For costs and any other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity. 3. The petitioners are the legal heirs of one Sri Nagappa, who was defendant No.4 in O.S.No.430/2007, which was decreed on 08.01.2018 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Devanahalli. In pursuance of which, Final Decree - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25817 WP No. 18514 of 2024 Proceedings in FDP No.21/2018 was filed before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Devanahalli. In the said proceedings, a compromise was entered into by defendant No.4, the father of the petitioners. On the expiry of the father, the petitioners filed an application under Order XXIII Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure, which came to be numbered as Miscellaneous Petition No.24/2022, challenging the compromise. The said miscellaneous petition came to be dismissed by the impugned order dated 19.02.2024, holding that a miscellaneous petition was not maintainable, and it is for the petitioners to file a writ petition challenging the compromise entered into before the Lok Adalat and in that background, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Sri. Anil Ramachandra, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the father of the petitioners has not signed the compromise voluntarily. The details and the contents of the compromise were not brought to his notice, nor was it read out in a language known to the petitioner/defendant No.4 since he did not know the English language. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25817 WP No. 18514 of 2024 5. He therefore submits that it is on that basis that a miscellaneous petition under Order XXIII Rule 3A of the CPC had been filed and now in the present writ petition on the very same ground, he submits that the settlement which has been allegedly arrived at before the Lok Adalat is without consideration and as such, not binding on the petitioners. 6. This Court is unable to agree with the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners inasmuch as the father of the petitioners has executed the compromise, which has been subsequently acted upon. During the lifetime of the father of the petitioners, there was no challenge made to the compromise. It is only after his expiry that a challenge has been made by his legal heirs. 7. There is nothing on record indicating that there was ever any statement made by the father, that there is no voluntary consent on his behalf, or that he was forced to sign the compromise. Such being the case, the legal heirs cannot now take up a stand contra the action taken by - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25817 WP No. 18514 of 2024 the father in the said proceedings. Hence, no grounds being made out, the petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE GJM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25