High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Mariyambi vs Khader Sab on 13 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Smt Mariyambi vs Khader Sab on 13 November, 2008
Author: S.N.Satyanarayana
IN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

EEATEID THIS THE 13"' my 09 NOVEMBER 

BE FORE

THE HON'E3LE MR. JUSTICE s.N.sATymARA:{;mA T'

R. F.A.No.812i;'2eci§§'    

BETWEEN

1 sm MARIYAMBI
W/o.HAJ: NABI
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
RfA.NO.?4,
SETUPALYA,

BANGALORE ANGRTH',1'.I\:i.UK   q 
.  I  *~.."_.1..,v.'A;>9ELLANT

(By  KRIsH}4:@PA,  ' 7

P;ND:_

 sAi3*  ..... 

 _  sway; READ BY LR3

 "A: 'V 
 -..%AGED.';.§.aQuT 65 $113.,

8)"  BEHIM
AGES ABOUT 38 'ms. ,

  KHAN

 "AGED AEOUT 35 ms"

. 9) NOUMANI KHAN
AGED ABOUT 33 ms. ,

E) BUQANI KFIAN
AGED ABOUT 30 YRS. ,

F} DURRANI KHAN

KAYAfi€G§J'T§{§g  V  "



reportingt that the dispute between them Vin

respect of suit schedule property is emfleehifflp

resolved and pray for disposal of_this'sppeale

in terns of the said compromise" petitioni

which reads as under: ,_ '= v. p,I._" E
The appellant a_endw the_ xiegal

representatives of Vnthe trespondents

herein submit as fo1ioss;hW_ V” V

1. The t”appeIlentjhp*wss the

piaintiifi endh the. respondent was the
defendsnt ii? the “trial Court. The
eppeIlentl:_hed\t filed a suit for
.flmendatoryHR ______ N_injunction and for
yudeoiaretion and for possession of the
hpropertyw bearing No.74, Sy.No.82
i’meesnrihg 36 ii 130 feet but. deceased

udrespondent disputed the claim of the

mnV appellant contending it belongs to him

x’. tbearing house list No.1064 in
Sy.No.82/5 situated at Kayamgutta, Sait
Palya, Bangalore North Taluk.

2. Taking into consideration the long

pendency of the litigation, the friends

“Mu

the Northern side of the property whiehrp

is demarked in the letters AE?§ ‘and ; =

coloured in orange. Both the,eppellanti

and the legal representatives;«ofarther

respondent herein havedn no “_Q1aimrVn

whatsoever against.a eachx Vother__ in

future.

5. Both the happe1lantxiand*.the legal
representativesw.fof_g_theihfrespondent
herein shall he at iiherty to hold and
possessien their respective properties
desc§i5edVflbO§e and deal with the same
in_the like fiannerfincluding obtaining
Katha, Vpa§ingI”kandayam, putting up
V_eonstrQctions;*i to obtain licenses
‘é.sanetien~ plan or certain encumbrance

__ ppidfiherefore, the parties hereby pray
uzthat this Hon’b1e Court be pleased to

dispose off the above appeal by
hirecording the above terms of settlement

in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The parties have also produced a

sketch along with Compromise Petition showing

“”\

the properties which each of them agreee_to

take in terms of the compromise petitieng

The respondent concedes that the appeilantiisat

in possession of the per ion esftjp:e§§%:y_”

identified in GREEN colour is ehoen°asj$xpeeJ?C

in the sketch predficeép along_Vheith~m the *i

Compromise Petition. The freepondent_ fhrther
concedes that they have given qp their claim
in respect of the portion which is shown as
‘ABCD’ which fa identified by KYELLQW. Colour
in the :ske£chj*ahn§xee’ to the compromise

petition _’ini_ favoer of the appellant

,_ Smt¢¥ariambif«,W;n.turn, the appellant concede

ii that the respondents-1(a) to (g) are together

in xpeesessieh of property identified in

— ‘0R§HGE{ colour, which is marked as ‘AEFB’ in

“ig:he«_ sketch appended to the compromise

-f;petitiong_

3. The parties who are present before

the Court have also accepted the recital in

“”7

the compromise petition executed by alii of

them jointly, in confirmation of the sgmefzfieyf.

have affixed their signature in_~tfieototdet'”

sheet maintained in the appeel:fiemo;>t’i4
The appeal is diepoeefi ofTeocordieeigi :i
In view’ of the settiement”*ettieed at
between the part1es;..’L’i’jth%e”_i:ia§~}§é:1._;».}§fw.:_is Aterititled
to refund of the Cogrt tee fiei6joe§eppeal memo

as permiesioie}efiflei the fiérfietaka Court- Fees
and Suits VeieationiAot,_i§o8.

Sd/-3;

Fudge