- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010350562011 NC: 2026:KHC:36195 RFA No. 601 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 601 OF 2011 (MON) BETWEEN: SRI. C.NAGARAJ, S/O. LATE CHIKKAVEERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT NO.423, VISVESWARAYA NAGAR, GANGENAHALLI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. Y.K.SHESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. V.RAJASHEKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. HMT LIMITED, A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.59, BELLARY ROAD, BENGALURU-560032 AND ONE OF ITS DIVISIONS, NAMELY WATCH FACTORY-I AND II, HMT P.O., BENGALURU-560031 AND REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER(HRM). 2. HMT WATCHES LIMITED, A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.59, BELLARY ROAD, BENGALURU-560032 Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010350562011 NC: 2026:KHC:36195 RFA No. 601 of 2011 AND ONE OF ITS DIVISIONS, NAMELY WATCH FACTORY-I AND II, HMT P.O., BENGALURU-560031 AND REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS ACCOUNTS OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS LISTED FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT Sri.Y.K.Sheshagiri Rao., counsel along with Sri.V.Rajashekar Reddy., counsel for the appellant and Sri.E.I.Sanmathi., counsel for the respondents have appeared in person. 2. The defendant has filed the appeal challenging the Judgment and Decree dated:02.11.2010 passed by the Court of IV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru (CCH-21). 3. Counsel for respective parties submits that Sri.C.Nagaraj., - the appellant and Smt.Bhavana Prasoon - the - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010350562011 NC: 2026:KHC:36195 RFA No. 601 of 2011 authorized representative of the respondents are physically present before the Court. They have been duly identified by their respective counsel. 4. Counsel appearing for the respective parties jointly submit that during the pendency of this appeal the appellant and the respondents have amicably resolved the dispute and accordingly they have filed a joint memo. Counsel, therefore, submits that the joint memo may be placed on record and appeal may be disposed of in terms of the joint memo. 5. When queried, the parties have stated that they have indeed settled the dispute and they have arrived at settlement and the appeal may be disposed of in terms of the settlement arrived by them. They further state that they have arrived at settlement on their own will and volition without there being any coercion and undue influence from any side. Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is handing over the Demand Draft bearing No.655415 in a sum of Rs.55,000/- drawn on SBI Bank in favor of HMT Limited to the authorized representative of the respondents. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010350562011 NC: 2026:KHC:36195 RFA No. 601 of 2011 Smt.Bhavana Prasoon - the authorized representative of respondents acknowledges the receipt of the Demand Draft in the open Court. 6. The oral submission made by the respective parties and the joint memo is placed on record. I have perused the same with utmost care. 7. As the parties to the lis have compromised the matter, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the joint memo, the Judgment and Decree dated:02.11.2010 passed by the Court of IV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru (CCH-21) is modified in terms of the joint memo. The Registry concerned is hereby directed to draw the decree in terms of the joint memo. Lastly, counsel for the respondents submits that the appellant had deposited a sum of Rs.20,000 before the Trial Court and in view of disposal of the appeal, a direction may be issued to the concerned Trial Court to permit the respondents to withdraw the said amount. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010350562011 NC: 2026:KHC:36195 RFA No. 601 of 2011 Submission is noted. In view of the settlement between the parties, the Trial Court is thereby directed to release the amount in favor of the respondents after due identification. Because of disposal of the appeal, interim order if any stands discharged and pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of. Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 79