High Court Karnataka High Court

Vishwas Kumar Das S/O Late A … vs Mrs. Shashi Jayaprakash Shetty on 12 January, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Vishwas Kumar Das S/O Late A … vs Mrs. Shashi Jayaprakash Shetty on 12 January, 2010
Author: Anand Byrareddy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT

DATED THIS THE 12"' DA.XQ_f€}A_?\fU'AI§§? 2{1VI_'{)V "  W

BEFORE;  I I '

TIII3 H'ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND.BV'Y:R'2XvVR'ED'DY ' %

REGULAR SECOND_AI'3E5EAL-»,F$Zo.559'OF=;i009

BETWEEN:  

1.      .
Son (Sf L:V14t'e_,./.\.'S':II1ti'I<TI';$;!I 'Kumai Das,
..yea_I'"'sV,.__' " 
;2esIdinIgII;;: _V;'?G.S.4Bu_Ildi_ng,

I" Fi<}()I°. I;2I:;;I~,»I _ I
M}:II1_g'a1I)I*é45751 {_i{')_6 "

§\)

' 'GIIfijzI Bzii ..DiIS,

"  W-.i.t'e of Laté"A;'S:inth<)sh Kumar Das.
 AAg::.d,axbe)ut 75 years,
  --R esVid»i:i;;._a'I;.Near Sai Baba Mandir,

"  L;:<,:;'II'I£:Ii'III,'

 Mangémire-575 006,

' Dsizksiiina Kannada.

*   "'-.,RepI*esenIed by her son and
V' -'General Power of Attorney Hofder
First Appellant herein.  APPELLANTS

  (By shI~I.CyI~II Pfilsi.-Id Pais, AdmcgeI



{U

AND:

lVIrs.Shashi Jayztprakash Shetty,
Aged about 50 years

Wife of Late J ayprakash Shetty,
Residing at Jayanaga.

l\/iartili.
l\/Iangal0i'e--57S 006,    j " * _   »
Dakshina Kannada.     

(Sh.ri.Sampath Anand Shetty, A'd.y_0cate')_r"'

This Regular  Apipeali::«tfi!et:%--.nndei' Seetion. 100 read

with Order Xfsill Rule I 'ef'C0'de::0fCIivil Procedure, 1908 against
the Jiiidgrnenfi.  _ide._e'ree dated: 16.3.2009 passed in
R.A.N(').78:'200Si':in..the iileief the l Additional Civil Judge (Senior
Division) and  iM.aiiga'lt)rei dismissing the appeal and
c<)nt'irining._the_jLidgrnent._a'nd decree dated: 19.3.2008 passed in
O.S..Na1i.557/i20()6' '(an the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Junior

 '_ Diyisitiyni) Mangalmie,___Dv.K. and etc.,

0    Appeal coining on for admission this day, the Court

A  de'l'i\'wered"'the f£;l.lt)wing: ~

JUDGMENT

” The appellants and the respondent are present before the

0 ii rt .

3

3

2. Shri Cyril Prasad Pais has entered appearance on behalf

of the appellants in the stead of the Counsel appe.arin_g earlier.

The same is taken on record.

3. The parties have filed a compromisepetitioni

reads as follows: V _ __ V _
“”COl\/IPROMISE PETITION FILED Ln§toEi§oRo.eRfXxiiti,

RULE 3 OF THE CODE on i(:”;1\/IL. Pnotctéoueeii l908 ii

The named above respectfully
submitas-_i’:etelulnd’e,ri’i . l

l. Theli2_espondenfiihaslfllyedlthe suit in O.S.No.557/2(){)6 on the

file of Cilvilliliiudge (Jr.Dn.) i\/langalore, D.K., against

5:._tlhe:,.,”e~.Appellants’ “”” ‘for the relief of permanent injunction

‘ them, their men and servants or anybody claiming

.”–throug”.ii–. ltytl under them from forcibly dispossessing the

il.”‘*Re:a;’pottdent from three items of the plaint schedule properties

i _ oriii any way interfering with the peaceful possession and

ii = renjoymeait of the plaint schedule properties by the Respondent.

The Trial Court by its Jttdgmem and Decree dated l9/()3/2()()8
was pleased to l)eei’ee the suit and granted an order of

Permanent injunction prayed by the Respondent

ix.)

{.33

.. clear inai’ketable title to the plaint schedule properties .

The Appellants herein aggrieved by the llflpugllfigii–:iljLli{ilg,lll6l1I
dated I9/03/2()08
R.A.No.78/2008 on the file of Civil 3L1dget—-{S_r:.iD:n;~l: (.3

and Decree filed

9.-

Mangalore. The 1″ Appellate Court \_5/2-is;p’§ea’éietl._:to–di§iini§si”:he

appeal in R.A.No.78/20()8_and eo_ntir_rned tihep’p§*tzdgirne’i’:tiand
Decree passed by the Trial in A V
The Appellants aggsiepved ‘by’ Jueliginenti and Decree
preferred the above” Appeal before this

H0n’ble. Court, V . V

The A-;3pellé1etS-.,anr;lii’i2eSpo’iident submit that in order to have
peace t21pIidrha1’int>”n,y’ iamily and due to the intervention of

the t’am_il’y Ema well wishers, the Appellants and

5:riies,.pOi1deiit iiiitE’]”l’til’i to settle the dispute amicably on the
V » t’r)Ali’o:winvg terms mentioned herein below.
.’The.iiRe.s:pt§’ncleiit admits and acknowledges that the Appellants

Dare i.np’o’ésession ofthe plaint schedule properties and have got

The

H l§’e.sponclent also admits that the Appellants have right, title

and intereet. over the plaint schedule properties.

3

A.

H ‘l

of their own wiil and ‘volition.

The Respondent ahs no objection on allowing the present
appeal by this Hon’ble Court and the prayer set._ont”i_n this

appeal

The Respondent admits the averinents wri’tten°’.._

statements and further Clarifies tliat tlieyere ti’ue.:_émd.elorreclt«.

The Respondent assures the A_ppellantS thatttshe.;h.a,sy vnc-3 dispute

nor will she at any time dispLife.._lthe_titlellof ‘lAplpellants.

The R-Appeiliants .«z-1I’i’ti ‘-Respo–ntl.e”nt submit that the above
co:7npr()rsi_ise’llisente,ife’tl._i’Iit.o’between them out of their own free
will and’ volit’ion’;”AlTheiieis no undue influence or coercion or

any sort of.,int’ei*ferenee by any third»~parties or parties to the

‘T’helAp’pel’i=:«;tnts and Respondent are aware of the terms of this
l”‘con’tprotii.ise petition and they have read and understood the

.. _’_z1bo’ve terms and they have signed this compromise petition

The Appellants and
Respondent hereby cont’i:”m 2-incl assure the other party that
they will not prefer any appeal. or challenge the terms of the

above settlement. The compromise entered between them is

Z

ll.

14.’

.0 filed—by him as a GPA Holder to Sushanth Karkeara on the file

6

irrevocable and no party can challenge the terms of the said
compromise.

The terms of the compromise shall be binding _4be_tw4ee_n the

parties and the terms of the compromise shall jgfiie’Ja~i–.l..:oir3er”all

earlier correspondences between the.V__._A~ppe.l@lants

Respondent notwithstanding an;/tihingcontaii2.eriv”tolithe?’ is

contrary in any other instrument or decree. i

. The Respondent further subni»its»t.hait the..Ju’dgimeh_t and Decree

dated ; 19/03/2003 if-01.Q.S.i\iiOii55i7:i2iO’Q§ on ti1i€”l’i’iE,ti of Principal

Ciyil ‘l\/lan_ga..lo’re may be set aside.

.The iApipetllant.. and’ R:e”:s.._oonideiit submit that the Judgment and

D-ecree l:{i.A.l%lti:i’fi8/iIZ.()(}8 on the file of E” Additional Civil

(Sr.Dn.ii ivi’a’i1gal()i’e may be set aside.

“The.v-..’:1.”i’viiippellant submits that the Original Suit No.2/2010

v Principal Civii Judge (Sr.Dn.) Mangalore, D.K., against the

Respondent herein shall be withdrawn immediately after

recortling conipmmise in thisgappeai. The above said

7
Susharith Karkera has also given his consent to withdraw the

above suit.

l5.The Respondent submits that the Original Suit N’o;:l’2s1/2009
filed by her pending before 3″” Additional

Mangalore D.K.._ shall also be withdrawn

recording compromise in this Appe.al_.

i6.That both the Appellants iilijeafiirhe

respective costs of the pro».’:leed_Vings.

t–hei’Appeil’ia.nts and the Respondent pray that the
above appealty iI]ltt’}’_il)’t3T’ The Judgment and Decree dated

I6/()3/.2()()9ill'”passe.dI– by the 1 Additionai Civil Judge (S£’.Dn.}

D.K.l”i’ri——–R.’A.No.78/2008 may be set aside and also
A ‘ .l£l_§Ilgil’l]E§ilil[ and Decree dated l9/O3/2008 passed in
on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Jr..Dri.)

Ma’riga}.__ore~.«i,’ D.K., may be set aside in terms of the above

eonipromise entered into between the parties and further pray

decree also may drawn up in terms of the above

settlement, in the interest ofjustice and equity.

5

On being satisfied as to the bunat–fides of _t_
the petition is allowed. The office is §jVi1″ectecf*’t’dvd

in terms ofthis order.

{IV

1′::?i*\?\a’~V'[1{3″c1.V decree