Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010261492018 NC: 2026:KHC:51628 RSA No. 1647 of 2018 C/W RSA No. 1648 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1647 OF 2018 (DEC/INJ) C/W REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1648 OF 2018 (INJ)
IN RSA No. 1647/2018 BETWEEN:
MOHANDAS G AMIN S/O LATE A GOPALA AMIN AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT 1-135/1, SATYANUGRAHA HOUSE ADYAR POST & VILLAGE, MANGALORE D.K DISTRICT -575 009. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. G RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. KUNHAPPA AMIN S/O LATE DOGRA POOJARY
SINCE DECEASED BY LRS R-1 (a) to (d)
1(a) HARINAKSHI
W/O CHADNRAHASA AMIN
D/O KUNHAPPA AMIN
AGED BOUT 63 YEARS
R/AT VISHNU KRIPA, ADYAR DOTA
ADYAR POST AND VILLAGE
MANGALORE TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT – 575 007. 1(b) MOHINI D/O KUNHAPPA AMIN
W/O LATE POOVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
R/AT VISHNU KRIPA, ADYAR DOTA
ADYAR POST AND VILLAGE
MANGALORE TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT – 575 007. Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: High Court of Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010261492018 NC: 2026:KHC:51628 RSA No. 1647 of 2018 C/W RSA No. 1648 of 2018
1(C) PADMALATHA
W/O SEETHARAMA AMIN
D/O KUNHAPPA AMIN
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
RESIDING AT BAJAL
GANADABETTU HOUSE
PALLAKERE, BAJAL POST
MANGALORE TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT – 575 009. 1(D) SAVITHA W/O SATHISH
D/O KUNHAPPA AMIN
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/AT VISHNU KRIPA, ADYAR DOTA
ADYAR POST AND VILLAGE
MANGALORE TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT – 575 007. AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED: 17.09.2026. 2. MEERANATHA AMIN S/O KUNHAPPA AMIN AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
3. JAYANTHA AMIN S/O KUNHAPPA AMIN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
4. CHANDRAHASA AMIN S/O NEMU POOJARY AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT DOTA HOUSE ADYAR VILLAGE & POST, MANGALORE TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT -575 009. …RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JITHIS JEIJO, ADVOCATE FOR PROPOSED R-1( A TO D), R-2, R-3, R-4 IS SERVED)
THIS RSA IS FILED U/S.100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.04.2018 PASSED IN RA.NO.227/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANGALURU, D.K.
ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.09.2015 PASSED IN OS.NO.261/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,MANGALURU D.K.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010261492018 NC: 2026:KHC:51628 RSA No. 1647 of 2018 C/W RSA No. 1648 of 2018
IN RSA NO.
1648/2018 BETWEEN:
MOHANDAS G AMIN S/O LATE A GOPALA AMNI R/A 1-135/1, SATYANUGRAHA HOUSE ADYAR POST & VILLAGE MANGALORE, DK DISTRICT -575 009. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. G RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. KUNHAPPA AMIN
S/O LATE DOGRA POOJARY
SINCE DECEASED BY LRS
R-1 (A TO E)
1(a) HARINAKSHI
W/O CHADNRAHASA AMIN
D/O KUNHAPPA AMIN
AGED BOUT 63 YEARS
R/AT VISHNU KRIPA, ADYAR DOTA
ADYAR POST AND VILLAGE
MANGALORE TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT – 575 007. 1(b) MOHINI
D/O KUNHAPPA AMIN
W/O LATE POOVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
R/AT VISHNU KRIPA, ADYAR DOTA
ADYAR POST AND VILLAGE
MANGALORE TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT – 575 007. 1(C) PADMALATHA
W/O SEETHARAMA AMIN
D/O KUNHAPPA AMIN
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
RESIDING AT BAJAL
GANADABETTU HOUSE
PALLAKERE, BAJAL POST
MANGALORE TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT – 575 009. - 4 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010261492018 NC: 2026:KHC:51628 RSA No. 1647 of 2018 C/W RSA No. 1648 of 2018
1(D) SAVITHA
W/O SATHISH
D/O KUNHAPPA AMIN
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/AT VISHNU KRIPA
ADYAR DOTA
ADYAR POST AND VILLAGE
MANGALORE TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT – 575 007. AMENDED VIDE COURT
ORDER DATED: 17.09.2026.
1(E) MEERANATHA AMIN S/O KUNHAPPA AMIN AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
RESIDING AT SAMRUDDI COMPLEX
ADYAR DOTA, ADYAR POST AND VILLAGE
MANGALORE TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT – 575 007.
AMENDED VIDE COURT
ORDER DATED: 21.09.2026.
2.
JAYANTHA AMIN
S/O KUNHAPPA AMIN
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
R/A DOTA HOUSE
ADYAR VILLAGE & POST
MANGALORE TALUK
DK DISTRICT – 575 009. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JAITHIS JEIJO, ADVOCATE FOR PROPOSED R-1 (A TO E) & R-2)
THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD 19.04.2018 PASSED IN R.A.NO. 228/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM., MANGALURU, D.K., ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD 29.09.2015 PASSED IN OS.NO.425/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., MANGALURU.
THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 5 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010261492018 NC: 2026:KHC:51628 RSA No. 1647 of 2018 C/W RSA No. 1648 of 2018
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT RFA No.1647/2018 is preferred by the appellants against the
judgment and decree dated 19.04.2018 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mangaluru, D.K. (for short “the First Appellate Court”) in R.A.No.227/2015, whereby the First Appellate Court allowed the appeal and reversed the judgment and decree dated 29.09.2015 passed in O.S.No.261/2011 by the I Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Mangaluru (for short “the Trial Court”)
2. RFA No.1648/2018 is preferred by the appellants against the judgment and decree dated 19.04.2018 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mangaluru, D.K. (for short “the First Appellate Court”) in R.A.No.228/2015, whereby the First Appellate Court allowed the appeal and reversed the
judgment and decree dated 29.09.2015 passed in O.S.No.425/2011 by the I Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Mangaluru (for short “the Trial Court”)
3.
Learned counsel for the appellant and respondents in both the appeals submitted that both parties have amicably settled
- 6 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010261492018 NC: 2026:KHC:51628 RSA No. 1647 of 2018 C/W RSA No. 1648 of 2018
the dispute between themselves and have filed a Compromise Petition dated 18.04.2026, which reads as under:
“APPLICATION UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 3 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908: The appellant and respondents respectfully submit as below:
1. RSA No. 1647/2018 was filed challenging the Judgment and Decree dated 19-04-2018 in RA No. 227/2015 passed by the Court of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge & CJM at Mangaluru, D.K. reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 29-09-2015 in OS No. 261/2011 passed by the Court of the I Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Mangaluru, D.K. OS No. 261/2011 was filed by appellant for a Judgment and Decree for declaration that the appellant has a right of easement of necessity in respect of RR Roadway as indicated in the plaint sketch and for permanent injunction restraining the respondents from obstructing the user of RR roadway which passes through Sy No. 27/2B and 27/1 of Adyar Village of Mangalore Taluk, D.K. District. In the suit relief of Judgment and Decree of Mandatory Injunction directing the respondent to remove the construction put by the respondent No. 1 in the portion of Plaint A schedule property. It is submitted that since during the pendency of the suit, roadway was blocked, appellant had sought for Judgment and Decree of Mandatory Injunction directing the respondents to remove the obstruction caused to the roadway. The suit was decreed and said
- 7 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010261492018 NC: 2026:KHC:51628 RSA No. 1647 of 2018 C/W RSA No. 1648 of 2018
Judgment and Decree was reversed in regular appeal. Hence, the regular second appeal is filed.
2. RSA 1648/2018 was filed against the Judgement and Decree dated 19-04-2018 in RA No. 228/2015 passed by the Court of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge & CJM at Mangaluru D.K., reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 29-09-2015 in OS No. 425/2011 passed by the Court of the I Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Mangaluru, D.K. OS No. 425/2011 was filed by the respondents for a Judgment and Decree of Permanent Injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. Said suit was dismissed and said
Judgment and Decree was reversed in regular appeal. Hence, defendant in the suit filed the regular second appeal. 3. During the pendency of the appeals, respondent No. 1 in both the appeals namely Kunhappa Amin died and his legal representatives were brought on record. Now by the intervention of well-wishers, friends and relatives, the parties have amicably settled the dispute with the following terms: (a) Parties have withdrawn the allegations made against each other and resolved the disputes amicably and the respondents admits the claim made in OS No. 261/2011. (b) Respondents admit that the appellant is having right of roadway of 10 feet width in R S No. 27/2B and 27/1 of Adyar Village of Mangalore Taluk, D.K. District which is mentioned as RR Roadway in the plaint sketch. The said road is shown in the red colour in the sketch enclosed along with this
- 8 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010261492018 NC: 2026:KHC:51628 RSA No. 1647 of 2018 C/W RSA No. 1648 of 2018
compromise petition. Further, the respondents have agreed to restore the said 10 feet roadway at their expenses within one year from this date. The respondents have also agreed to lay pipeline for flow of rain water by the side of the road in their property. (c) Respondents have agreed to remove the portion of the encroachment of their building in the property of the appellant in R S No. 27/5 of Adyar Village of Mangalore Taluk, D.K. District. The respondents have agreed to remove the encroachment within a period of one year. The portion which is to be removed in shown in Yellow colour in the annexed sketch. (d) The Respondents undertake not to obstruct the appellant from using the 10 feet wide road. That all the parties are entitled to effect repairs to the 10 feet wide road. (e) Appellant agreed to execute Sale deed in favour of the respondent No. 1 (a) i.e, in favour of Smt. Harinakshi in respect of 0-01 Acres ( OneCent ) of land in RS No. 27/1 of Adyar Village of Mangaluru Taluk, D.K. District. The appellant undertakes to execute the sale deed within one year from this date. The property undertaken to be sold in marked in Blue Colour in the annexed sketch.
(f) In view of the aforesaid understanding and lawful compromise entered in to, OS No. 425/2011 may be dismissed and a Judgment and decree in OS No. 261/2011 may be passed as per this compromise petition. - 9 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010261492018 NC: 2026:KHC:51628 RSA No. 1647 of 2018 C/W RSA No. 1648 of 2018
4. The appellant and respondents submit that this compromise petition is entered into with clear understanding about the consequences and there are no act of coercion, undue influence or compulsion on any of the parties. Wherefore, it is respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to accept this compromise petition and a
Judgment and Decree may be passed as per the terms of this compromise petition in the interest of justice and equity.
4. In both the appeals, both parties and their respective counsel are present before the Court and have been identified by their respective counsel. Both parties have duly signed the compromise petition by accepting the terms of the aforesaid compromise petition.
5. In view of the aforesaid settlement arrived at between 5the parties, the appeals stand disposed of in terms of the Memorandum of Compromise Petition.
6. In view of the above, I pass the following:
ORDER (i) Both the appeals are disposed of in terms of the application under Order XXXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
- 10 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010261492018 NC: 2026:KHC:51628 RSA No. 1647 of 2018 C/W RSA No. 1648 of 2018
(ii) The impugned judgment and decrees, both dated 19.04.2018 passed by the First Appellate Court in R.A.Nos.227/2015 and 228/2015 respectively and the impugned judgments and decrees, both dated 29.09.2015 passed by the Trial Court in O.S.Nos.261/2011 and 425/2011 respectively, are hereby modified in terms of the aforesaid Compromise Petition. (iii) Registry is directed to draw up decree accordingly. (iv) The Registry of this Court is directed to refund the entire Court Fee paid on the Memorandum of Appeals back to the appellants.
Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
BMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13