- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6704 RSA No. 1096 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1096 OF 2013 (INJ) BETWEEN: SRI T D GANAPATHI AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS S/O DURGA NAIK AGRICULTURIST R/AT THAGADLE HOSUR VILLAGE MATHIKAL POST HOSANAGARA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MURALI B S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI T B MANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O BEERA NAIK AGRICULTURIST RESIDING AT THAGADLE HOSUR VILLAGE MATHIKAL POST HOSANAGARA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT 2. SMT SUMITRA @ DEVAMMA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS W/O T B MANJAPPA Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6704 RSA No. 1096 of 2013 RESIDING AT THAGADLE HOSUR VILLAGE MATHIKAL POST HOSANAGARA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT 3. SRI CHANDRASHEKARA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS S/O T B MANJAPPA RESIDING AT THAGADLE HOSUR VILLAGE MATHIKAL POST HOSANAGARA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT RESPONDENTS ARE NOW REP. BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SHRI. RAGHAVENDRA S/O T B MANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESIDING AT THAGADLE HOSUR VILLAGE MATHIKAL POST HOSANAGARA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B N SHETTY FOR R1-R3., ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD 8.2.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO.51/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., SAGAR, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD 2.6.2010 PASSED IN OS.NO.59/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., HOSANAGAR. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6704 RSA No. 1096 of 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT The respondents have filed a power of attorney, wherein the respondents authorised the power of attorney holder to act and file a compromise petition on behalf of the respondents. The same is taken on record. 2. The appellant and the GPA holder of the respondents are present before the Court and they are identified by their respective counsel. 3. The parties to the appeal filed a compromise petition which reads as follows: “The appellant and the respondents herein above most respectfully submit as under; 1) The appellant herein was the sole plaintiff in a suit filed by him seeking for the relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from putting up any structures over the suit property or obstructing the free movement of the plaintiff. The said suit was registered in O.S.No.59/2008 on the file of the learned Civil Judge & JMFC at Hosanagara. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6704 RSA No. 1096 of 2013 2) The suit property described was a Cart Road (Way) measuring to an extent of 3 meters x 150 meters running from West to East from the main road to the land of the plaintiff, situated in the middle of Sy.No.90/2 and Sy.No.43 of Hosur Village, Hosanagara Taluk, Shimogga District and bounded on; East by Land belonging to plaintiff and Vazrappa, West by: Main Road, North by: Land and house of the plaintiff in Sy.No.90/2 and South by: Sy.No.43 belonging to Forest Department and KPTCL, on which the defendants constructed the house. 3) The said suit being contested by the defendants /respondents herein, the learned trial judge after hearing the parties and appreciating the evidence on record was pleased to decree the suit of the plaintiff / appellant and thus restrained the defendants from obstructing the use of the suit way or making construction over the way until due process of law, vide Judgement & Decree dated 02.06.2010. 4) The defendants, aggrieved by the above judgement & decree dated 02.06.2010, preferred Regular Appeal before the Learned Senior Civil Judge & JMFC at Sagar in R.A.No.51/2011. The learned Appellate Judge, after reappreciating the evidence on record and the arguments advanced, was pleased to allow - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6704 RSA No. 1096 of 2013 the said appeal, by setting aside the Judgement & Decree dated 02.06.2010 in O.S.No.59/2008, and consequently dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. 5) Aggrieved by the divergent findings of the courts below, plaintiff has preferred the above Second Appeal before this Hon'ble Court and this Hon'ble Court by an order dated 08.08.2022 was pleased to admit the above appeal and framed one substantial question of law. 6) The above matter being heard subsequently by this Hon'ble Court on 19.09.2025, and having verified the nature of dispute between the parties, it was felt necessary to relegate the parties for mediation so as to settle the dispute, and as such parties were directed to appear on 09.10.2025 before the Mediation Center at Hosanagara, Shivamogga. 7) It is now seen from the records that the dispute between the parties is settled before the mediation center, in terms of the report dated 28-10-2025 submitted by the Learned Mediator to the Learned Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Hosanagara, in O.S.No. 59/2008, and as such, the parties having reported that they would file compromise petition before this Hon'ble Court, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6704 RSA No. 1096 of 2013 the parties have thus filed the present Compromise Petition on the following terms; TERMS & CONDITIONS: a) Both the parties having resolved the dispute between them before the Mediator and thus confirm that the defendants have agreed and as such shall not disturb the usage of the Land measuring 60 meters in Length (East to West) running from WEST to EAST and 12 Feet in breadth (North to South), as Road, situated in the middle of Sy.No. 90/2 and Sy.No.43 of Hosur Village, Hosanagara Taluk, Shimoga District, more fully described as the Compromise Petition Schedule Property, for the ingress & egress of the Plaintiff /Appellant, his family members, coolies, laborer's etc., and the said movement shall not be obstructed by the defendants, their agents, family members or anybody claiming under them. b) The plaintiff & his family members, coolies, labourers etc., shall be entitled to use the Road between the points 'A' to 'B', in Sy.No.43 so as to reach his land in Sy.No.40/2 as detailed in the 'SKETCH', passing through the points 'C, D & E' to reach his land, as prepared by one - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6704 RSA No. 1096 of 2013 Shri.N.S.Ravindra, Civil Engineer, at the behest of the Mediator, enclosed herewith, describing the actual topography of the Compromise Schedule Property, which shall form part and parcel of this Compromise Petition. The defendants or their family members shall not disturb the said usage of Road by the Plaintiff. c) In the event of either of the parties deviating from the above terms or acting detrimental to the interest of the other party as agreed above, the aggrieved party shall be entitled to execute this compromise decree to the extent they are affected, and before the competent court. d) Both the parties have understood the legal effect and consequences of the above terms of compromise being explained in their local language and they being present before the mediator and having prepared the sketch as agreed by them. 8) In this view of the matter, the above compromise between the parties may kindly be recorded and the above appeal be disposed of in terms of the compromise. Wherefore, the plaintiff / appellant and defendants /respondents most humbly pray that this Hon'ble Court be - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6704 RSA No. 1096 of 2013 pleased to record the terms of the above compromise and dispose of the appeal in terms of the compromise, in the interest of justice and equity. COMPROMISE PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY Land measuring 60 meters in Length (East to West) running from WEST to EAST and 12 Feet in breadth (North to south), situated in the middle of Sy.No. 90/2 and Sy.No.43 of Hosur village, Hosanagara Taluk, Shimoga District and bounded on; East by : Land in Sy. No. 40/2 belonging to the plaintiff- T.D.Ganapathi and Land in Sy. No 40/3 of Defendant-T.B.Manjappa West by : Remaining land in Sy.No.43 belonging to the Government and Thereafter Zilla Panchayath Road North by: Land in Sy.No. 90/2 belonging to T.D.Ganapathi-plaintiff described from the Letter 'B' to ‘C’, Government land in Sy.No.43 from the Letter 'C' to 'D' and thereafter Land in Sy.No. 90/3 belonging to T.B.Manjappa- Defendant South by: Government Land in Sy.No. 43 and the defendants House, Cattle shed, and their backyard.” 4. The contents of the compromise petition are read over and explained to the parties in Kannada language known to them. They have accepted the terms and conditions of the compromise petition and they have no - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6704 RSA No. 1096 of 2013 objection to dispose of the appeal in terms of the compromise petition. 5. I have perused the compromise petition. There is no legal impediment in accepting the compromise petition. The compromise petition is taken on record. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise petition. 6. The Registry is directed to draw decree in terms of the compromise petition. 7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE PA CT:KHV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1