- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010025922025 NC: 2026:KHC:45728 MFA No. 441 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 441 OF 2025 (CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. NAGARAJA S/O LATE MUNIANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 2. SRI SHIVANNA, S/O LATE MUNIANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 3. SRI BYREGOWDA S/O LATE MUNIANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS ALL THE APPELLANTS ARE RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, PIN - 562163 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. PADMAMMA W/O PATALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT THIMMASANDRA VILLAGE, THARAHUNASE VILLAGE, Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010025922025 NC: 2026:KHC:45728 MFA No. 441 of 2025 JALA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, PIN - 562157. 2. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O N A THYAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 206, NAGAVARA AREBIC COLLEGE POST, BENGALURU - 560 045. 3. SRI KALEGOWDA S/O LATE KEMPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, PIN - 562 163. 4. SMT. MARAKKA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS SRI MURTHY S/O RAMANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, PIN - 562 163. 5. SMT. RATHNAMMA W/O KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK PIN - 562 163. 6. SMT. HANUMANTH GOWDA S/O RAMANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010025922025 NC: 2026:KHC:45728 MFA No. 441 of 2025 KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK PIN - 562 163. 7. SRI KEMPEGOWDA S/O RAMANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, PIN - 562 163. 8. SRI MUNEGOWDA S/O LATE KEMPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, PIN - 562 163. 9. SRI KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE KEMPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, PIN - 562 163. 10. SMT. MANJAMMA W/O MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT GADENAHALLI VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, PIN - 562 157. 11. SMT. KEMPAMMA W/O LATE MUNIKEMPAMMA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, PIN - 562163. 12. SRI RAMANJINAPPA S/O LATE MUNIKEMPANNA, - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010025922025 NC: 2026:KHC:45728 MFA No. 441 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, PIN - 562 163. 13. SRI RAVI S/O LATE MUNIKEMPANNA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, PIN - 562163. 14. SMT. JAYAMMA WIFE OF LATE MUNIANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS, RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, PIN - 562163. 15. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AERA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NO.39, SHANTHI GRUHA, BHARATH SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING, 4 TH FLOOR, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T N VISWANATHA.,ADV. FOR R1 & R2; SRI. K.VARAPRASAD FOR R9; SRI. A. LOURDU MARIYAPPA FOR R12; R3 TO R6, R8 TO R11, R13 & R15 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 01.04.2024 PASSED ON I.A. NO. 1 IN O.S.NO. 437/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C.,, DEVANAHALLI, ALLOWING THE I.A. NO.1 FILED UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010025922025 NC: 2026:KHC:45728 MFA No. 441 of 2025 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents are present. 2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the parties have resolved their dispute by filing a compromise petition before the trial Court, which is accepted by the learned counsel for the respondents. Therefore, in view of the compromise having been executed and the suit having been closed, the present appeal would not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE RCK, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2