RFA 262/2001 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 11 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2014

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL

R.F.A.No.262/2001

BETWEEN

1. K KRISHNE GOWDA S/O MALLE GOWDA AGED 48 YEARS

2. K MADHU RAGHAVENDRA S/O K KRISHNE GOWDA AGED 20 YEARS

3. K VIJAY S/O K KRISHNE GOWDA AGED 19 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT D.724, 2ND CROSS 9TH MAIN, SIDDARTHA LAYOUT MYSORE ... APPELLANTS

(By Sri.T N RAGHUPATHY, ADV.)

AND

1. G S SHESHEGOWDA S/O PATEL SIDDEGOWDA SINCE DEAD BY L.RS

(a) VANAJAKSHAMMA 50 YEARS , WIFE OF SHESHEGOWDA

(b) G S LAVA, 36 YEARS ,

(c) G S KUSHA 26 YEARS ,

RFA 262/2001 2

(d) G S KRISHNA 33 YEARS ,

L.Rs. (A) IS THE WIFE, (B) TO (D) ARE THE CHILDREN OF DECEASED SHESHEGOWDA AND R/AT GENDEHOSAHALLI, TQ

(e) G S POORNIMA AGED 32 YEARS W/O.C.LAXMEGFOWDA D/O SHESHEGOWDA, R/AT KYATHEGOWDANAHALLI TQ

2. AMASE MARIGOWDA S/O.PATEL SIDDEGOWDA

3. S MADEGOWDA S/O.PATEL SIDDEGOWDA

4. KEMPAMMA W/O.PATEL SIDDEGOWDA DECEASED BY L.RS. R1(a) TO R1(e), R2, R3 & R16 (VIDE COURT ORDER DT.22.1.2004)

5. PUTTAMA W/O.MARIGOWDA DECEASED BY L.RS.

(a) MARIGOWDA (b) SRIKANTA (c) SWAMY (d) MANJU (a) IS THE HUSBAND, (b) TO (d) ARE CHILDREN OF PUTTAMMA 5(a) TO (d) ARE R/AT GENDEHOSAHALLI, HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK. (VIDE COURT ORDER DT.5.7.2005)

6. DODDATHAYAMMA @ SIDDAMMA W/O.LATE RAMEGOWDA MAJOR, VARUNA HOBLI, MYSORE TQ 7. MANGALAMMA W/O.SANNEGOWDA MAJOR, R/AT RANGASAMUDRA HOBLI, T.NARASIPURA TQ

RFA 262/2001 3

8. MARIYAMMA W/O.SHEKAR, MAJOR 3RD CROSS, SUBASHNAGAR CITY

9. DODDATHAYAMMA W/O.LATE M MADEGOWDA MAJOR,

10. GOWRAMMA W/O.SHAMBUGOWDA MAJOR,

9 AND 10 ARE R/OF GANDEHOSAHALLI VILLAGE, ARAKERE HOBLI SRIRANGAPATNA TQ

11. LAXMAMMA W/O.PUTTASWAMY GOWDA MAJOR, R/AT 3832/1 OMMARAKAYYA ROAD TILAK NAGAR, MYSORE 570 015

12. SAVITRAMMA W/O.MARIGOWDA

13. MARIGOWDA S/O.LATE MADEGOWDA

14. CHIKKONU S/O.LATE MADEGOWDA

12 TO 14 ARE R/OF.NERALAKERE ARAKERE HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TQ

15. SAVITRAMMA W/O.PUTTASWAY MAJOR, R/AT HANUMANALU VILLAGE, BANNUR HOBLI T.NARASIPURA TQ

16. S PUTTASWAMY S/O.PATEL SIDDE GOWDA

RFA 262/2001 4

MAJOR, R/AT GENDEHOSAHALLI ARAKERE HOBLIL, SRIRANGAPATNA TQ ... RESPONDENTS

(By Sri.V.SRINIVAS, ADV. FOR R1(b-e) Sri B.M.SHYAM PRASAD, ADV. FOR R3, R2, 1(a), R8, 9, 10, R5(a-d) – SERVED, R1(a-e), R2, R3, R16, TREATED AS L.RS. OF DECEASED R4 – V/O DT. 22.1.04, NOTICE TO R6, R7, R11 TO R16 ARE DISPENSEC WITH DT.31.7.2002 & 2.11.2011 RESPECTIVELY)

THIS RFA FILED U/S 115 CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.01.2001 PASSED IN OS NO. 21/92 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, (SR DN), `SRIRANGAPATNA, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

1. A compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC by the appellants and respondents 1(a) to 1(e) reporting settlement arrived at between them and requesting the Court to dispose of this appeal in terms of the compromise entered into, has been filed.

2. It is stated in the compromise petition that remaining respondents have already entered into compromise with the appellants and their rights have been already conferred on the appellants. It is urged by them that this Court has already recorded the compromise dated 11.12.2008. Therefore, the

RFA 262/2001 5

dispute remains only between the appellants and respondents

1(a) to 1(e).

3. The compromise petition is signed by the appellants and respondent 1(b) for himself and as power of attorney of respondents 1(a), 1(c), 1(d) & (e). Copy of the power of attorney executed by the other respondents in favour of respondent 1(b).

4. Appellants and respondent 1(b) are present before the

Court. They admit the compromise and submit that terms have been explained to them and they have affixed their signature voluntarily accepting the compromise. Respondent 1(b) acknowledges and accepts the execution of general power of attorney by his brothers and sister in his favour and the due execution of the release deed in favour of the appellants.

5. In the light of the compromise arrived at between the parties, this appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise.

The terms of compromise shall form part of the decree.

Sd/- JUDGE

KK