High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Swami Gowda vs Smt Sannamariyamma on 29 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri Swami Gowda vs Smt Sannamariyamma on 29 October, 2010
Author: Anand Byrareddy
Sn N Gowda, Advocate]
V '   Sddannamariyarnrna

'-  'Residing at Kenehanahalli Viiiage
 "iiasaba I-Iobh -- 571 430 .. Respondent

IN THE HIGH coum or KARNATAKA AT H
DATED THIS THE 29th DAY 0:4′ ‘oe’To13.4ER;V«:§jo’i'{;_
BEFORE ‘ _ V . _
THE HON’BLE
Regular Second:-‘.Appea1”I\To;’ : of 2009″ V2

Between:

1. Sri Swami _
S/o Kuliasanappa ~. 1 _ _
Bette Gowda.§ 55f’yeéir’s. . ” ‘

2. Sri Sann£ipHfiaeA_v 2 _’ _
Son of Swami Gov:=.dVa’,”3tO”y_ears ‘

3. SIr1t.Bettar1*m_;avV V _ .. ”
Wife of _-Swami “G_oWda, 4-5 years

A11 residing at.Keneha{naha11iVi11age
Hoblei’ < v ._
Pa.nd.avap:1ra" Taluk
Man.dy~:; Dis%;fi'é:te1'571 430 .. Appeliants

Wi4fe~ofdRame Gowda, 81 years

[By Sri Sridh ar C . K. , Advocate for
CaVeator/ Respondent)

H

the subject matter of

appeal.

. That in consideratiotu”ofA_the;
agreement the appeiltarits 1 t ‘ hereby ” ., , ,

agree & undertake to reIiri.qu{rsh.,VVV

release and all yested
in the property.

Kenchannajy ‘ e–.Vi11age;- V. . V §__asaba– 1

Hobli, ‘T Manclya
. and
Eastttfyby: Property of
Bullappa, West

‘ K.S.Swamy Gowcla,

A ” North’:.by:e’:’_”Property of Gowdegowcla

‘ —- Kenchannaly

‘Bu1?_appa, South by: Gavigowda

S/otvfiuttaswamygowda, and other

bearing Sy.No. 32/6,

Village, Kasaba–1

Hobli, Pandavapura Taluk, Mandya

District, measuring 0.02 guntas and
bounded on East by: Property of
Kuntappa @ Bettegowda, West by:
North by:

Bettegowda S / o Sannegowda, South

Canal, Property of

by: Boregowda S / o

.5

Sannamarigowda, in favour
husband of the respondent
name of the respzondenit,
appellants .bir._id Vth_e’1nselvesVVp:
execute the ~._(i’oe1}1nient
requiredto give’ the”ab’ove
terms it V

6. The either. iparties I declare
right over

_.t”he”. s’chedffLj;Vtl:e’ v–.prop.erties from their

“”” and.lthe””parties are hereby

deliver the possession

4′ . fallen to them as

” theconsipromise from this day.

‘Ilhat~either party hereby undertakes

to withdraw any proceedings before

iflcourts of law or authorities with
it respect to the properties involved in
the compromise.

8. That either party shall support each
other if they make any application
for change of their name in the
Property Register, khatha, etc., of

the schedule properties.

.,property–~–r ”

kl

Schedule-A

i) All that piece

property

Kenchannaly Véiiage, K3eaba- .

Pandavapura Mandyal’ District,
measuring: . O2 ” and Pltjountied
On: _

East: _ Property. of

WeSt;:jy.Property of Sannaiizariyamma

North ‘”P’ro.peif£:y “o’f,:t3ar:r1amariyarnma

or _ ‘ilotidanarasegowda

AV ‘ H “—-.’Sci1edu1e-«B

ii}._:Ai1eT’t}ié1tVé”pieee and parcel of the

bearing Sy. No. 7/8,

Keiiehannaly Village, Kasaba–1 Hobli,
:’V”_~v_v.Pa~rid”avapura Taluk, Mandya District,

‘ irieasuring 0.12 guntas and bounded

3 on:

East: Property of Swamygowda

West: Property of Doddanarasegowda
North: Property of Swamygowda
South: Property of Doddamogegovvda”

bearing’ P A. ‘P’ Sy..N”o -~ . p 7-if

‘Zr’

2. It is also noticed that Smt. Bettamrnia

affixed her thumb impression to e.pplicatioli<3_VV

represented before the Court by lllielf'-husbertid: :ai°1d"'.sonl,lV¢

however is not present befor"e».:l:t'l:e' of
illness. The statement. 'taken on
record. Accordingly, being in
consonaricefl'witlfizdthg"0-fijlaw, the same is
allowed The office shall draw

up a decree lilnTter_rns oftiie compromise petition.

Sd/:1

Itidcjé

C c is ..Pr}1g/