B. Subhash S/O S. Nagalingyya Shetty vs Town Muncipality Kampli on 6 September, 2017

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

B. Subhash S/O S. Nagalingyya Shetty vs Town Muncipality Kampli on 6 September, 2017

Bench: K. Somashekar

                             :1:


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                      DHARWAD BENCH

           DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017

                           BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. SOMASHEKAR

       WRIT PETITION NOS.103801-103802 OF 2017(LB-UC)

Between:

1.    B. SUBHASH,
S/O S.NAGALINGYYA SHETTY
AGED 40 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O KONERU COMPLEX, KOTTAL ROAD,
OPPOSITE PWD OFFICE, KAMPLI
TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI.

2.    B. BHIMSEN SHETTY,
S/O LATE BASAPPA SHETTY
AGED 68 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O GANESH KRUPA, KOTTAL ROAD,
OPPOSITE PWD OFFICE, KAMPLI
TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI.
                                          .. PETITIONERS
(BY SRI ANANT HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.    TOWN MUNCIPALITY, KAMPLI
REP. BY CHIEF OFFICER,
KAMPLI, TQ. HOSPETE, DIST. BALLARI.

2.    GADAGI VIRUPAKSHI
S/O GADAGI CHOUDAPPA
AGED 41 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O KOTTAL ROAD,
OPPOSITE PWD OFFICE, KAMPLI,
TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI.
                                       .. RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.K. ACHAR, ADV. FOR R2.
PETITIONS DISMISSED IN RESPECT OF RESPONDENT NO.1)
                                     :2:


        THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT
THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 TO INITIATE FURTHER
ACTION IN LAW IN TERMS OF ORDER DATED 09.03.2017
BEARING        NO.SAM       PUSAKAM/K.PA/2016-17           MARKED           AT
ANNEXURE-H AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2
TO     TAKE     FURTHER        ACTION      IN    LAW     PURSUANT           TO
APPLICATION DATED 15.03.2017 MARKED AT ANNEXURE-J

        THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:



                                 ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No.2 and their respective parties are present before the Court and have filed a joint compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure wherein it is stated as under:

"1. The writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking relief against unauthorized construction of building by respondent No.2. The Hon'ble Court has granted interim order in favour of petitioners. After the service of notice the petitioners and respondent No.2 have negotiated the settlement as under.

2. The respondent No.2 undertakes not to obstruct/and object for parking of the vehicles on the lane in front of the schedule property.

:3:

3. The respondent No.2 undertakes not to keep any explosives in the schedule premises and not to let the premises for running business of cooking gas, t.v. shops, mobile shops, bar and Restaurant, Lodge and any business involving gambling and anything prohibited under law.

4. The petitioners have no objection for respondent no.2 to run vegetarian hotel in the 1st floor of the premises. Respondent No.2 undertakes not to have any pipe line and window on his building towards the property of petitioner no.1.

5. The respondent No.2 undertakes to construct at his own cost a wall measuring 9 inches in thickness 37 feet in length 6 feet height separating his property and property of the 1st petitioner.

6. The respondent No.2 further undertakes not to construct toilet beneath the staircase. Respondent No.2 undertakes to paint the compound wall belonging to petitioners within 30 days from this date.

7. The respondent no.2 further undertakes that he has no objection for construction of house by the petitioners in their respective properties.

8. The respondent No.2 further undertakes that all above conditions are binding on his successions in interest.

9. The petition against the respondent No.1 is not pressed and same may accordingly be dismissed.

10. In the event of non compliance of the terms of the compromise the leave may kindly be granted to the petitioners to execute the order as if it is a decree of the civil court/or for filing contempt petition.

:4:

11. Description of the schedule property:-

Property situated in Property bearing V.S.No.219 in Kampli village, tq. Hosapete district, Ballari. Bounded by East by house of Bhimsen Shetty, West by colony road, North by property of Suguru B. Maregouda, South by property of B. Subhash. Above contents are read over and explained to petitioners and 2nd respondent in Kannada and parties have signed the same after understanding and agreeing to the contents."

2. The compromise petition is signed by both the petitioners and respondent No.2 and their respective counsel. The petitioners and respondent No.2 submit that they are aware of the terms and conditions stated in the compromise petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as no relief is claimed against respondent No.1 in the compromise petition, petitions as against respondent No.1 may be dismissed. A memo is filed to that effect and the same is also stated in the compromise petition.

:5:

In view of the memo and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, writ petitions as against respondent No.1 are dismissed.

In terms of the compromise arrived at by the parties, as per the compromise petition, these writ petitions stand disposed off.

SD/-

JUDGE kmv

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court