- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2100 RSA No. 699 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 699 OF 2017 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RAMARATHNA ALVA W/O LATE DR U B ALVA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS R/O SRI BHAGYODAYA NEAR SRI SUBRAHMANYA SWAMY TEMPLE, SOODA KARKALA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT 3 576 101 2. SMT SANJATHA HEGDE W/O SRI SRINATH HEGDE AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/O NADISALGATHU HOUSE POST:PADUBIDRI UDUPI DISTRICT 3 576 101 3. SMT KAVITHA HEGDE W/O SRI HARIKRISHNA HEGDE AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/O A-103, RANKA CORNER APARTMENT CAMBRIDGE LAYOUT BANGALORE-560008 &APPELLANTS (BY SRI. VAISHALI HEGDE., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2100 RSA No. 699 of 2017 AND: 1. SRI.B.R. NOOKESH S/O LATE SRI B REVANASIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/O DODDABATHI VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577002 2. SMT AMBAVVA W/O SRI DASARA MALLAPPA AGED MAJOR R/O KAIDALU VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 3 577002 3. SMT SANNATHAI W/O SRI HADADI HANUMANTHAPPA AGED MAJOR R/O DODDABATHI VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 3 577002 &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N.K. SIDDESWARA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 R2 & R3 ARE SERVED) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD 13.01.2017 PASSED IN R.A.NO.90/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE DAVANAGERE., DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD 02.07.2015 PASSED IN OS.NO.22/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE, DAVANAGERE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2100 RSA No. 699 of 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This Court vide order dated 22.08.2025 referred the matter for mediation to the Karnataka Mediation Centre, Bengaluru (<KMC=). 2. The Deputy Director of KMC has submitted a Memorandum of Settlement, arrived at by the parties under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 8the CPC9) read with Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005, which reads as follows: <MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT UNDER SECTION 89 OF CPC READ WITH RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE KARNATAKA CIVIL PROCEDURE ( MEDIATION) RULES, 2005 The parties above named beg to submit as follows:- I. The appellant has filed the above Regular Second Appeal against the judgement and decree dated 13.01.2017 passed by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Davanagere in R.A. No. 90/2015 and the judgement and decree dated 02.07.2015 passed by the Prl. Civil Judge, Davanagere in O.S No.22/2010 in decreeing the suit and dismissing the appeal. 1. The 1st respondent/plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration of title that he is the owner in possession and enjoyment of suit schedule property - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2100 RSA No. 699 of 2017 and permanent injunction in respect of the kana property bearing Khaneshumari No.19, measuring East to West 60 feet and North to South 135 feet situated at Doddabathi Village, Davanagere Taluk bounded on East by: Karlahalli Thippanna's Kana, West by: Siddaiah's Kana, North: Road and South by: Kana of Ganji Ningappa and Kadappa. The 1st respondent/plaintiff claims to have acquired the schedule property through a partition entered into their family on 21.03.2002. Prior to that the respondent's/plaintiff's claim is that his brother B R Ajantha purchased a suit schedule property from Kencha Yellappa on the sale deed dated 13.04.1992 and subsequently he acquired its through partition. 2. The 1st appellant who is defendant No.3 in O.S No.22/2010 claim at Dr. U.B Alva her husband has purchased the suit schedule property from Ambavva the 2nd respondent herein on 27.07.1985. With the said rival contentions suit was contested and the suit came to be decreed by judgment and decree dated 02.07.2015. The appellants preferred appeal before Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Davanagere in R A No.90/2015 which came to be dismissed on 13.01.2017. Challenging the said judgments the appellants have preferred the above appeal. II. During the course of mediation, the appellants and 1st respondent along with their counsel were present, identified each other and they have resolved their differences on the following terms: 1. The 1st respondent has agreed to pay totally a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) to the appellants and the appellants have agreed to receive the same. On receipt of the said amount the appellants have agreed to give away their claim over the suit schedule property in favour of the 1st respondent/plaintiff. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2100 RSA No. 699 of 2017 2. Accordingly, the 1st respondent has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) to the 1st appellant and Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each to the 2nd and 3rd appellants. The 1st respondent had obtained three demand drafts in favour of the appellants which are as follows:- a) D.D bearing No.042381 dated 15.12.2025 drawn on Bank of Baroda, Davanagere Branch for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) in the name of 1st appellant. b) D.D bearing No.042383 dated 15.12.2025 drawn on Bank of Baroda, Davanagere Branch for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) in the name of 2nd appellant. c) D.D bearing No.042382 dated 15.12.2025 drawn on Bank of Baroda, Davanagere Branch for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) in the name of 3rd appellant. The 1st respondent/plaintiff has agreed to hand over the demand drafts to the appellants before the Hon'ble Court at the time of reporting a settlement. 3. The appellants state that, on encashment of the said demand drafts they shall have no claim whatsoever over the suit schedule property, admitting the ownership of 1st respondent/plaintiff over the suit schedule property. 4. The parties to the above appeal further admit that their dispute is resolved without there being any undue influence, coercion from anybody. 5. The parties to the above appeal further submit that the above settlement does not in anyway harm or hamper the rights of respondents No.2 and 3 in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2100 RSA No. 699 of 2017 view of the alienation made by 2nd respondent in favour of 1st appellant's husband. SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTY Kana property bearing Khaneshumari No.19, measuring East to West 60 feet and North to South 135 feet situated at Doddabathi Village, Davanagere Taluk bounded on: East by: Karlahalli Thippanna's Kana, West by: Siddaiah's Kana, North: Road and South by: Kana of Ganji Ningappa and Kadappa III. In view of the aforesaid agreement entered into between the parties, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to dispose off the above appeal in terms of the aforesaid agreement. IV. In view of the aforesaid agreement, the both the parties pray that the court fee paid in the respective cases be ordered to be refunded= 3. Appellant No.3/Kavitha Hegde and respondent No.1/B.R.Nookesh are present before the Court and they have been identified by their respective counsel. 4. In terms of the Memorandum of Settlement, respondent No.1 has handed over three demand drafts to appellant No.3, viz., one for a sum of Rs.50,000/- drawn in favour of Kavitha Hegde, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2100 RSA No. 699 of 2017 Rs.1,00,000/- drawn in favour of Ramarathna Alva and Rs.50,000/- drawn in favour of Sanjatha Hegde. 5. Appellant No.3/Kavitha Hegde, who is identified by her counsel, acknowledges the three demand drafts. 6. As the parties have settled the matter before the Mediation Centre, the Memorandum of Settlement filed by the parties is taken on record. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the Memorandum of Settlement. 8. Office to draw the decree in terms of the Memorandum of Settlement. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE RK CT:KHV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5