- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22733 RSA No. 385 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.385 OF 2010 (MON) BETWEEN: 1. SMT E.N.MUTHAMMA W/O EREGOUNDANA LATE NANJAPPA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HER LRS APPELLANT NOS.2 TO 8 2. SRI.E.N.CHENGAPPA S/O EREGOUNDAPPA LATE NANJAPPA 3. SRI E.N MACHAIAH S/O EREGOUNDAPPA LATE NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 4. SRI E.N.DEVAIAH S/O EREGOUNDAPPA LATE NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, 5. SMT E.B.KAMALA W/O EREGOUNDANA LATE BAIRAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRs A-6 to A8 6. SRI E.B.HARISHCHANDRA AGED 42 YEARS S/O EREGOUNDANA LATE BAIRAPPA 7. SRI E.B.GANAPATHY AGED 40 YEARS S/O EREGOUNDAPPA LATE BAIRAPPA Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22733 RSA No. 385 of 2010 8. SRI E.B.HARISH AGED 37 YEARS SON OF EREGOUNDANA LATE BAIRAPPA ALL RESIDENTS OF MAKKANDUR VILLAGE MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT- 571 201 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI N JAGADISH BALIGA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI N B THAMMAIAH @ MUTHAPPA AGED 57 YEARS S/O NAPANDA BOPAIAH, JANATHA COLONY, GUMMANAKOLLI, KUSHALNAGAR TOWN-571 234 SOMWARPET TALUK SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS 1(a) SMT.N.T.DHANU @ DHANALAKSHMI AGED 35 YEARS DAUGHTER OF LATE N.B.THAMMAIAH @ MUTHAPPA 1(b) SMT.VINU @ LEELAVATHI AGED 35 YEARS DAUGHTER OF LATE N.B.THAMMAIAH @ MUTHAPPA 1(c) SRI N.T.MANJUNATH @ MOHAN KUMAR AGED 30 YEARS SON OF LATE N.B.THAMMAIAH @ MUTHAPPA 1(d) SMT.N.T.VASANTHI AGED 28 YEARS DAUGHTER OF LATE N.B.THAMMAIAH @ MUTHAPPA THE RESPONDENT R1(a) to R1(d) ARE RESIDENT OF JANATHA COLONY, GUMMANAKOLLI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22733 RSA No. 385 of 2010 KUSHALNAGAR TOWN-571 234 SOMWARPET TALUK 2. SRI.N.B.JOYAPPA @ MANI AGED 53 YEARS S/O NAPANDA BOPAIAH, SABARIGIRI ESTATE, HADAGERI VILLAGE, HATTIHOLE POST-571 201 MADIKERI TALUK 3. SRI.N.B.MACHAIAH @ PATTU S/O NAPANDA BOPAIAH AGED 51 YEARS, C/O KENJANA KRISHNAPPA MUKKODLU AVANDI VILLAGE, HATTIHOLE POST-571 201 MADIKERI TALUK RESPONDENT NO.3 DIED INTESTATE LEAVING BEHIND HIS BROTHERS AND SISTER R1 AND 2 AND 4 TO 6 AS HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES 4. SRI N.B.NANDA KUMAR @ CHENGA AGED 47 YEARS, S/O NAPANDA BOPAIAH MAKKANDUR VILLAGE & POST, MADIKERI TQ.-571 201 SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRs 4(a) SMT.N N MAMMATHA AGED 37 YEARS WIFE OF LATE N.B.NANDAKUMAR @ CHENGA 4(b) KUM.N.N.DINA AGED 23 YEARS DAUGHTER OF LATE N.B.NANDAKUMAR @ CHENGA - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22733 RSA No. 385 of 2010 4(c) KUM.HARSHITHA AGED 21 YEARS DAUGHTER OF LATE N.B.NANDAKUMAR @ CHENGA THE RESPONDENT R4(a) to R4(c) ARE RESIDENT OF MAKKANDUR VILLAGE AND POST MADIKERI TALUK – 571 201 5. SRI.N.B.BHEEMAIAH S/O NAPANDA BOPAIAH AGED 45 YEARS, MAKKANDUR VILLAGE & POST, MADIKERI TALUK-571 201 6. SMT N.B.PUSHPAVANI @ LOKI D/O NAPANDA BOPAIAH AGED 49 YEARS, W/O DEVAPANDA S SUBBAIAH KUDLIGE VILLAGE & POST, KUSHALNAGAR-571 234 SOMWARPET TALUK SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRs R6(a) SMT.D.S.ANITHA AGED 32 YEARS DAUGHTER OF LATE N.B.PUSHPAVANI @ LOKI R6(b) SMT D S DEEPIKA AGED 30 YEARS DAUGHTER OF LATE N.B.PUSHPAVANI @ LOKI R6(c) SMT.D.S.SHRUTHI AGED 28 YEARS DAUGHTER OF LATE N.B.PUSHPAVANI @ LOKI THE RESPONDENT R6(a) TO 6 (c) ARE RESIDENT OF KUDIGE VILLAGE AND POST - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22733 RSA No. 385 of 2010 KUSHALNAGAR – 571 234 SOMWARPET TALUK …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. O SHIVARAMA BHAT, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.10.2009 PASSED IN R.A.NO.53/2000 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) MADIKERI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.10.2000 PASSED IN O.S.NO.129/1997 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) KODAGU. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT All the appellants are present before the Court. 2. On behalf of the respondents, power of attorney holder by name Sri N.B.Joyappa is present. 3. They present a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 4. On enquiry, parties agree that the contents of the compromise petition depict the true terms of settlement and there is no force, undue influence or coercion in reaching out the terms of the compromise petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22733 RSA No. 385 of 2010 5. Suit is one for redemption of mortgage. 6. Therefore, even though this Court has admitted the appeal on the following substantial questions of law, placing the compromise petition on record the substantial question of law is answered accordingly. “Whether both the Courts below were justified in dismissing the prayer of the plaintiffs for redemption of mortgage of suit schedule property in favour of original defendant No.1 when admittedly they are not parties to the sale deed for conveying the suit schedule property subsequently in favour of defendant No.1.” 7. As such there is no impediment for this Court to accept the compromise petition and dispose of the appeal in terms of the compromise petition in answer to the substantial questions of law raised at the time of admission by order dated 10.07.2013. 8. Hence, the following: ORDER i. Appeal stands disposed of in terms of the compromise petition answering the substantial question of law accordingly. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22733 RSA No. 385 of 2010 ii. Office is directed to pass modified decree in terms of the compromise petition appending the copy of the compromise petition along with sketch as part of the decree. iii. Parties are at liberty to carry out necessary revenue entries in terms of the compromise decree. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 2 Sl No.: 18