- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32472 WP No. 11963 of 2016 C/W WP No. 5782 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 11963 OF 2016 (GM-CPC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 5782 OF 2016 (LR-RES) IN WP No.11963/2016 BETWEEN: 1. MRS. PAULIN MONICA D'SOUZA, W/O HERALD SEQUEIRA, AGE:47 YEARS, R/A MARIA, OPP:KULASHEKAR POST OFFICE, MANGALORE, D.K. DISTRICT. 2. VICTOR LANCY D'SOUZA, S/O LATE JOHN D'SOUZA, AGE:39 YEARS, 3. MARTIN GABRIAL D'SOUZA, S/O LATE JOHN D'SOUZA, AGE:34 YEARS, PETITIONERS NO.2 AND 3 R/AT THOGARI HITHLU, NEAR SYNDICATE BANK, BOLOOR, MANGALORE, D.K.DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S. RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MRS. SERAPHINA LUCY D'SOUZA, W/O VALERIAN PINTO, AGE:42 YEARS, Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32472 WP No. 11963 of 2016 C/W WP No. 5782 of 2016 R/A CPC COMPOUND, URWA LONG LANE, MANGALORE - 6, D.K. DISTRICT. 2. THOMAS MICHEAL D'SOUZA, S/O LATE JOHN D'SOUZA, AGE:45 YEARS, R/AT CPC COMPOUND, URWA LONG LANE, MANGALORE - 6, D.K. DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. SHRIHARI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 21.09.2016) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 9.6.2015 PASSED ON I.A.NO.5 IN EXECUTION PETITION NO.31 OF 2014 ON THE FILE OF FIRST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC MANGALORE AS PER ANNX-A AND ETC., IN WP NO.5782/2016 BETWEEN: 1. MRS PAULIN MONICA D'SOUZA, W/O.HERALD SEQUEIRA, AGE:47 YEARS, R/A. MARIA, OPP:KULASHEKAR POST OFFICE, MANGALORE, D.K.DISTRICT. 2. VICTOR LANCY D'SOUZA, S/O.LATE JOHN D'SOUZA, AGE:39 YEARS, 3. MARTIN GABRIAL D'SOUZA, S/O LATE JOHN D'SOUZA, AGE:34 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32472 WP No. 11963 of 2016 C/W WP No. 5782 of 2016 PETITIONERS NO.2 AND 3 R/AT THOGARI HITHLU, NEAR SYNDICATE BANK, BOLOOR, MANGALORE, D.K.DISTRICT. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S RAJASHEKAR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MRS. SERAPHINA LUCY D'SOUZA, W/O.VALERIAN PINTO, AGE:42 YEARS, R/A CPC COMPOUND, URWA LONG LANE, MANGALORE-6, D.K.DISTRICT. 2. THOMAS MICHEAL D'SOUZA, S/O.LATE JOHN D'SOUZA, AGE:45 YEARS, R/AT CPC COMPOUND, URWA LONG LANE, MANGALORE-6, D.K.DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. SHRIHARI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 21.09.2016) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 9.6.2015 PASSED ON I.A.NO.4 IN EXECUTION PETITION NO.31 OF 2014 ON THE FILE OF FIRST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE, AND JMFC MANGALORE AS PER ANNEXURE - A AND ETC., THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32472 WP No. 11963 of 2016 C/W WP No. 5782 of 2016 ORAL ORDER In WP.No.11963/2016, the petitioners are challenging the order dated 09.06.2015 on IA.No.V in Ex.P.No.31/2014 (Annexure-A) on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Mangaluru. 2. In WP.No.5782/2016, petitioners are assailing the order dated 09.06.2015 on IA.No.IV in Ex.P.No.31/2014 (Annexure-A) on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Mangaluru. 3. It is submitted by Sri S.Rajashekar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri K.Shrihari, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 that, the parties have settled the matter amicably and accordingly, a compromise petition is filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It is also submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that, though notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with by this Court, however, respondent No.2 has agreed for the compromise - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32472 WP No. 11963 of 2016 C/W WP No. 5782 of 2016 and accordingly, signed the application filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC r/w Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. Taking into consideration the verifying affidavit filed by the parties, enclosed along with the application, I am of the view that, the dispute between the parties is resolved in terms of the compromise, entered into between the parties as per the compromise petition. It is also made clear that the division of the property as stated in the compromise is forthcoming from the sketch appended to the compromise petition and the same is also the part of the compromise petition. 5. With this observation, the writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE PB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34