- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9299 RFA No. 2258 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2598 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2258 OF 2024 (PAR) C/W REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2598 OF 2024 (PAR/DEC) IN RFA No. 2258/2024 BETWEEN: 1. KUMARI PRIYANKA .G.N.M D/O LATE G. MANJU @ G. MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS 2. SMT. BHARATHI W/O LATE G. MANJU @ G MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT NO.11 YELACHENAHALLI, KASI NAGAR 9TH CROSS, J P NAGAR POST KANAKAPURA ROAD BENGALURU-560 078. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NAIK .N.R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. JANAKI G SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS SRI. G. NARASIMHALU S/O GUTTI RAMAIAH Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9299 RFA No. 2258 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2598 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS R/AT NO. 59, 24TH A CROSS KARESANDRA VILLAGE BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU-560 070. 2. SRI. G. MURALI KUMAR S/O G. NARASIMHALU AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT NO. 2, YELACHANAHALLI KASI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 078. 3. SRI. MUNIKRISHNA S/O LATE P. KUPPUSWAMY AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS 4. SMT. BHUVANESHWARI W/O MUNIKRISHNA SINCE DECEASED SRI. DOREBABU S/O MUNIKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 5. SMT. SUMATHI W/O DOREBABU AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R3 TO R5 ARE R/AT NO. 11 YELACHENHALLI KASI NAGAR, 9TH CROSS J P NAGAR POST KANAKPURA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 078. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VISWANATHA SETTY .V, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 AND C/R2; V/O DATED 16.02.2026 R3 TO R5 ARE DELETED) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 9.08.2024 PASSED IN OS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9299 RFA No. 2258 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2598 of 2024 NO.802/2017 ON THE FILE OF C/C XXXVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, (CCH-38), BANGALORE, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION. IN RFA NO. 2598/2024 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. BHARATHI .M W/O. LATE G. MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 2. KUMARI. PRIYANKA D/O. LATE G. MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.59, 24TH 'A' CROSS BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU-560 070. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NAIK .N.R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. NARASIMHALU .G S/O. GUTTI RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.59, 24TH 'A' CROSS KARESANDRA VILLAGE, BSK II STAGE BENGALURU-560 070. 2. SRI. MURALIKUMAR .G S/O. G.NARASIMHALU AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS 3. SRI. BHARATH KUMAR.N.M S/O. G.MURALI KUMAR AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R2 AND R3 ARE RESIDING AT NO.2, YELACHANAHALLI - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9299 RFA No. 2258 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2598 of 2024 KASI NAGAR BENGALURU-560 078. 4. SMT. DEVI .G W/O MOHAN .V AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.59, 24TH 'A' CROSS KARESANDRA VILLAGE BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU-560 070. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. VISHWANATH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 TO C/R4) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.10.2024 PASSED IN OS.NO.8690/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE C/C. XXXVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE (CCH 38), BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND DECLARATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL JUDGMENT For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to as per their rank before the trial Court in O.S.No.802/2017. 2. These two appeals arise out of the judgments and decrees passed in O.S.No.802/2017 and O.S.No.8690/2016. O.S.No.8690/2016 was instituted by - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9299 RFA No. 2258 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2598 of 2024 the daughter-in-law and grand-daughter against defendant No.1–Narasimalu and other defendants seeking partition and separate possession of their alleged share in the suit schedule properties, claiming the same to be ancestral in nature. O.S.No.802/2017, on the other hand, was filed by the mother of the pre-deceased son Manjunath seeking her lawful share in the estate of her deceased son. The Trial Court, while decreeing O.S.No.802/2017 by granting 1/3rd share to the mother of the pre-deceased son, dismissed O.S.No.8690/2016 by recording a categorical finding that the suit schedule properties are the self- acquired properties of defendant Nos.1 to 4. 3. Aggrieved by the grant of preliminary decree in O.S.No.802/2017 and the dismissal of O.S.No.8690/2016, the daughter-in-law and grand-daughter have preferred the present appeals. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9299 RFA No. 2258 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2598 of 2024 4. When the matters were taken up today, the parties have filed a joint compromise petition duly signed by them and their respective counsel. It is stated therein that the plaintiffs in O.S.No.802/2017, though having secured a preliminary decree granting 1/3rd share in the estate of the pre-deceased son Manjunath, have, in view of the amicable settlement arrived at within the family, voluntarily relinquished and given up their rights in the said 1/3rd share. By virtue of such relinquishment, the daughter-in-law and grand-daughter, who were plaintiffs in O.S.No.8690/2016, are enabled to inherit the entire estate of the pre-deceased son Manjunath. 5. On a specific query made by this Court, the daughter-in-law–Bharati and the grand-daughter– Priyanka, who are personally present before the Court, have submitted that the contents of the compromise petition have been read over and explained to them in their vernacular language and that they have understood the same fully. They have further submitted that they - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9299 RFA No. 2258 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2598 of 2024 have voluntarily entered into the compromise without any coercion, undue influence or misrepresentation, and that the settlement is beneficial to them. 6. This Court places on record its appreciation for the gesture shown by the plaintiffs in O.S.No.802/2017 in giving up their 1/3rd share in favour of the daughter-in-law and grand-daughter so as to bring a quietus to the long- standing family dispute. The sincere efforts made by the learned counsel on both sides in facilitating an amicable settlement are also appreciated. 7. Having carefully examined the terms of the compromise petition, this Court is satisfied that the settlement is lawful, voluntary, and not opposed to public policy. The compromise being a bona fide family arrangement intended to resolve inter se disputes, deserves to be accepted and recorded. 8. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the preliminary decree drawn in O.S.No.802/2017 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9299 RFA No. 2258 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2598 of 2024 granting 1/3rd share to the plaintiffs therein cannot survive and is accordingly liable to be set aside. However, in so far as O.S.No.8690/2016 is concerned, the judgment and decree shall stand affirmed, subject to and in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties. 9. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) Both the appeals are disposed of in terms of the joint compromise petition. (ii) The judgment and preliminary decree dated 09.08.2024 passed in O.S.No.802/2017 granting 1/3rd share to the plaintiffs therein is hereby set aside in view of the compromise. (iii) The judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.8690/2016 shall stand affirmed, subject to - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9299 RFA No. 2258 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2598 of 2024 and in terms of the compromise petition filed before this Court. (iv) The compromise petition shall form part and parcel of the decree. (v) Office is directed to draw up a fresh decree in accordance with the compromise and this judgment. (vi) In view of the settlement, the Registry is further directed to refund the court fee to the appellants–defendants in accordance with law. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21