IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF ocToBER«.:.>;o_oé_'_ "
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR.JUS'I'ICE ASHOK B;<4H1reCTHic_gE_R:V"VV
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL.No.._s§22/2Qo'2v = " "
Between K V. 'A
N.Krishnappa.
S/0 Kate Narasimhaia
Aged about 82 years, __ :
R/a No.15}. /2, 26m 'A' cross'. V
6%' Block, Jayaraagar,
Bangaiore V Appelkant
{by SrivVV'T.l§/I.,Pfa]/<Va'a'»l*:1e',. Aaxfj .. a E'
£..\_...I1..s.3}. §
'~ _ 1 . ., Narayarxiapp-a','
S,/Ve iate Bande Muniyappa,
" 1 ;3i»r'1Ce'-cfiead, by his L.R.s
" smé';'s3:;ja'tha
__ Aged' about 44 years,
.. D {.0 late M. Narayanappa.
M"r.Sreedhar.N
Aged about 42years.
S / 0 late M.Narayanappa.
e) Mr.Sreenath.N
Aged about 40 years,
s/0 late M.Narayanappa.
d) Mr.Raja.N
e)
b)
Aged about 38 years.
s/o late M.Narayanappa.
SIr1t.§\/Iunilakshrni
Aged about 35 years.
D / 0 late M.Narayar1appa.
All are r/a No.152/3, New No.3/3,"
26th 'A' Cross, 6th block, .
Bangalore 121. '
M.Krishr1appa, ' _ . ~
S / 0 late Bande Mun§yap_pa,&:v
Since dead by hisH_I,_.Rs__ C '
Smt-Prabiral'.
Aged a'r';ou{_6_€) yvears; ._
W/or M. Kri_shna.ppa,.'.(1ate).
8/ 0. late M';~Krishna'ppa,
4, ' '1\v1r.Vas1;i,..V_ '"
" Aged about '35-~y'ears.
S/to late M.Krishnappa.
A Zia} to a portion
of p'1*emisesf_be'ar'ing No. 152 / 3,
6"?-Block; Jayanagar, Yediyur,
Bangalore 11.
" Tile Commissioner,
r Corporation of the City
of Bangaiore,
Bangalore 2. ... Respondents
(by Sri K.P.Rao, Adv for R1, 2(a & 13)
Sri S.N.Prakash Chandra, Adv for R3
Sri K.P.Rao, Adv for Rlfb)
Smt Prabhamurthy, Adv for R1(a, c, d. e]_. ‘ ~’-‘
This Appeal is filed u/Sj9″6″of the A
judgment and decree dated¥__ 15..4z.i’2002 “passed gin
OS.No.803/1994 on the file of the VXVI’–.Addi.C’ity ‘Civi1;}_’utig’e._
Bangalore, dismissing the suit”._fo’r de~ei’aurat1on_V; and
mandatory injunction.
This Appeal coming on_fo:t:’O.rdei’s this’day.,/the Court
delivered the foiiowing; ‘ ,
The representatives of
responderit A the joint memo duly
signe<:VlVbv learned Advocates.
The res'pec'tive'Eeat;ned'"Advocates identify the signatures of
theii".partics'. _%I'b;e joint nriemo reads as follows:
"JOINT MEMO
A A. and IRS of the Respondents No.1
andst-gbmit that on the advice of friends and well
the parties above named have amicably
A j settled all the disputes between them in respect of
the suit property. In order to maintain good
A neighbourly relations the IRS of the Respondent
No.2 hereby undertakes to keep the I % ft. x 35 ft.
space between the properties of the Appellant and
the Respondent No.2 open to the sky for enjoyment
of natural light and air by both parties and
19324
undertakes not to put up any further 5'
thereof in the said open space. Both
that in so far as IRS offRespond.ent«
concerned, the Appellant "no
whatsoever in regard to the cons_tfactio::c"rrio.rieV
the deceased first Respondent
The parties pray that this—Ifo'n'–bletACourt'bepleased
to record the appeal as
withdrawnpin the iiqht..ofa1dooe'»~}jorfVipromise, to
meet the The parties
have to :.:.'o_are_ cost of the
proceeding? rthroicgh. au:. 3'
2. eompromise arrived at by the
appellantxand.tne._IegaIrifepresentatives of respondent Nos.1
and5l2,vvt1rii s appeai Visdismissed as withdrawn.
V .AVIeai*n.ed counsei for the appeiiant submits that
the. appellant is not pressing the appeai as against
respondent No.3. The appeal is dismissed as not pressed as
A’ against respondent No.3. No order as to cost.
Sd/~
JUDGE
Nd/~«