- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28371 RSA No. 929 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.929 OF 2012 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. HANUMANTHAPPA S/O LATE BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 2. SIDDAPPA S/O LATE BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 3. NAGARAJ S/O LATE BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 4. GOWRAMMA W/O LATE BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS ALL ARE AGRICULTURIST R/O BELAVANURU VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK-577007 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. B.K. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. RUDRAMMA W/O LATE KENCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS SINCE DEAD BY LRS. Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28371 RSA No. 929 of 2012 2. NAGARAJ S/O LATE KENCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS 3. K. RAJAPPA S/O LATE KENCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 3 ARE R/O BELAVANURU VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK-577007. 4. SMT. GANGAMMA W/O DYAKKARA NINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/O CHIKKAKOGALURU VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK-577007. 5. PREMA W/O MUGANNARA MANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/O GUNDAGATTHI VILLAGE HARAPAANAHALLI TALUK. 6. GEETHAMMA W/O MARUR HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/O BELAVANUR VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK-577007 7. RAMAPPA S/O LATE SIDDALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS 8. B.Y. MAHENDRANATH S/O YELAVATHI VEERABASAPPA MAJOR, RESPONDENTS NO.7 TO 8 ARE R/O BELAVANUR VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK-577007 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28371 RSA No. 929 of 2012 9. NAVEENKUMAR T.S. S/O SHANKAR MURTHY T.H. LOKIKERE VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK. (DELETED VIDE ORDER DATED 11.06.2026) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N.R.GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R6 [THESE RESPONDENTS ARE TREATED AS LRS OF DECEASED R1]; R7 AND R8 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 06.03.2012 PASSED IN R.A.NO.2/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, DAVANAGERE, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.11.2010 PASSED IN O.S.NO.192/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, DAVANAGERE. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the parties would submit that in favour of respondent No.3-K.Rajappa, respondent Nos.2, 4, 5 and 6 have executed a power of attorney and copy of the power of attorney is produced before the Court. 2. The counsel for the parties also submit that respondent No.8 has already executed sale deed in favour of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28371 RSA No. 929 of 2012 brother of appellant No.1. Hence, respondent No.8 is not a party to the compromise. Copy of the said deed is placed before the Court. 3. The appellant Nos.2 to 4 have also executed power of attorney separately in favour of appellant No.1, respondent Nos.2, 4, 5 and 6 have also executed power of attorney separately in favour of respondent No.3. The respondent No.7 has also executed power of attorney separately in favour of respondent No.3. The copies of the same are also produced before the Court. 4. The parties have filed the compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. The parties are represented through their power of attorney holders and this Court also verified power of attorneys executed by the parties and they have understood the terms of the compromise petition. 5. The compromise petition is taken on record. 6. In terms of the compromise petition, the regular second appeal is disposed of. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28371 RSA No. 929 of 2012 7. The Registry is directed to draw the decree in terms of the compromise petition filed under Order 23 Rule 3 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. In terms of the compromise, Item No.1 of the suit schedule properties which has already been sold in favour of respondent No.9 vide registered sale deed dated 17.01.2024 is ratified by the parties. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15