Karnataka High Court
Gurappa S/O Tukkappa Ganur @ Uppar vs Devadas Dhareppa Gannur & Ors on 22 November, 2018
Author: H.T.Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T.Narendra Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
RSA NO.200314/2016
C/w
RSA NO.200315/2016
IN RSA NO.200314/2016:
BETWEEN:
GURAPPA
S/O TUKKAPPA GANUR @ UPPAR
AGE: 75 YEARS, OCC: PENSIONER
R/O JORAPUR PETH, VIJAYAPUR.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI SHIVAKUMAR KALLOOR, ADVOCATE
& SMT. CHANDRAKALA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEVADAS DHAREPPA BANDENAVAR @ UPPAR
AGE:60 YEARS, OCC:ASST. MASTER,
R/O:JAIL DARGA, TQ:VIJAYAPUR.
2. SHARADABAI D/O TUKKAPPA BANDENAVAR
AGE:43 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:JORAPUR PETH, VIJAYAPUR.
3. SHANTAWWA W/O GURAPPA GANUR
AGE:53 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:JORAPUR PETH, VIJAYAPUR.
2
4. SMT.PARVATI W/O KALLAPPA PATIL @ UPPAR
AGE:57 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:SHAIKARKHANE, VIJAYAPUR.
DIED BY LRS.
4a. SIDDAPPA S/O KALLAPPA PATIL AMENDED AS PER
COURT ORDER
DATED 22.11.2018
4b. BAPUGOUDA S/O KALLAPPA PATIL
4c. SHARANAWWA W/O DHAREPPA BANDI
ALL ARE MAJORS,
R/O SHIKARKHANA HOLIKATTA
NEAR VIJAYAPURA.
5. SMT RUKMAWWA W/O VITHAL SAKARE
AGE:59 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:JORAPUR PETH, VIJAYAPUR.
DIED AMENDED AS PER
COURT ORDER
NO LEGAL HEIRS DATED 22.11.2018
6. CHANDAPPA RAMAPPA
@ RAMACHANDRA BANDI
AGE:70 YEARS, OCC:GOUNDI,
R/:KRISHNA NAGAR, TARDAL,
TQ:HATKANAGALA, DIST:KOLHAPUR.
7. BHAGAWAN S/O RAMAPPA
@ RAMACHANDRA BANDI
AGE:57 YEARS, OCC: GOUNDI, ,
R/O:KRISHNA NAGAR, TARDAL,
TQ:HATKANAGALA, DIST:KOLHAPUR.
8. PARASARAM RAMAPP
@ RAMACHANDRA BANDI
AGE:55 YEARS, OCC:GOUNDI,
R/O:KRISHNA NAGAR, TARDAL,
TQ:HATKANAGALA, DIST:KOLHAPUR.
9. NARAYAN S/O RAMAPPA @ RAMCHANDRA BANDI
AGE:53 YEARS, OCC:GOUNDI,
NOW R/O:KRISHNA NAGAR, TARDAL,
TQ:HATKANAGALA, DIST:KOLHAPUR.
3
10. PADAMAWWA
W/O DASRATH, CHAMKAR
AGE:82 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
NOW R/O:KRISHNA NAGAR, TARDAL,
TQ:HATKANAGALA, DIST:KOLHAPUR.
11. SUSHILABAI W/O LAXMAN SANGLIKAR
AGE:72 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:SAIDPUR GALLI, DHARWAD,
12. YALLAWWA W/O SIDDAPPA MOPAGAR
AGE:58 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:GYANG BOWDI, VIJAYAPUR.
13. MEENAXI W/O HANUMANTH SAKARENAVAR
AGE:57 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:SHIKARKHANE, VIJAYAPUR.
14. KAMALABAI W/O VISHWANATH UPPAR
AGE:57 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:UPPAR GALLI, JORAPUR PETH,
VIJAYAPUR.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VEERANGOUDA MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2;
SRI KRUPA SAGAR PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R12, R14, R6
R9, R10, R11, R13, R3, R4(A TO C)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND
DECREE DATED 27.07.2016, PASSED IN R.A.No.47/2013 ON
THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, VIJAYPUR
AT:VIJAYPUR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.01.2013, PASSED IN
O.S.NO.166/2004 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE BIJAPUR AT:BIJAPUR.
4
IN RSA NO.200315/2016:
BETWEEN:
GURAPPA
S/O TUKKAPPA GANUR @ UPPAR
AGE:75 YEARS, OCC:PENSIONER,
R/O:JORAPUR PETH, VIJAYAPUR.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI SHIVAKUMAR KALLOOR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEVADAS DHAREPPA BANDENAVAR
AGE:60 YEARS, OCC:ASST. MASTER,
R/O:JAIL DARGA, TQ:VIJAYAPUR.
2. SMT.PARVATI W/O KALLAPPA PATIL @ UPPAR
AGE:57 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WRK,
R/O:SHAIKARKHANE, VIJAYAPUR.
DIED BY LRS
2A. SIDDAPPA S/O KALLAPPA PATIL
AMENDED AS
2B. BAPUGOUDA S/O KALLAPPA PATIL PER COURT
2C. SHARANAWWA W/O DHAREPPA BANDI ORDER DATED
ALL ARE MAJORS 22.11.2018
R/O SHIKARKHANA HOLIKATTA
NEAR VIJAYAPURA
3. SMT RUKMAWWA W/O VITHAL SAKURE
AGE:59 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WRK, AMENDED AS
R/O:JORAPUR PETH, VIJAYAPUR. PER COURT
DIED NO LEGAL HEIRS- ORDER DATED
22.11.2018
4. CHANDAPPA RAMAPPA
@ RAMACHANDRA BANDI
AGE:70 YEARS, OCC:GOUNDI,
R/:KRISHNA NAGAR, TARADAL,
TQ:HATKANAGALA, DIST:KOLHAPUR.
5
5. BHAGAWAN W/O RAMAPPA
@ RAMACHANDRA BANDI
AGE:57 YEARS, OCC:GOUNDI,
R/O:KRISHNA NAGAR, TARADAL,
TQ:HATKANAGALA, DIST:KOLHAPUR.
6. PARASARAM RAMAPP
@ RAMACHANDRA BANDI
AGE:55 YEARS, OCC:GOUNDI
R/O:KRISHNA NAGAR, TARADAL,
TQ:HATKANAGALA, DIST:KOLHAPUR.
7. NARAYAN RAMAPPA
@ RAMCHANDRA BANDI
AGE:53 YEARS, OCC:GOUNDI,
R/O:KRISHNA NAGAR, TARADAL,
TQ:HATKANAGALA, DIST:KOLHAPUR.
8. PADAMAWWA
W/O DASRATH, CHAMKAR
AGE:82 YEARS,
OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:KRISHNA NAGAR, TARADAL,
TQ:HATKANAGALA, DIST:KOLHAPUR.
9. SUSHILABAI
W/O LAXMAN SANGLIKAR
AGE:72 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O:SAIDPUR GALLI, DHARWAD,
10. YALLAWWA W/O SIDDAPPA MOPAGAR
AGE:58 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O:GYANG BOWDI, VIJAYAPUR.
11. MEENAXI
W/O HANUMANTH SAKARENAVAR
AGE:57 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:SHIKARKHANE, VIJAYAPUR.
12. KAMALABAI
W/O VISHWANATH UPPAR
AGE:57 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
6
R/O: UPPAR GALLI, JORAPUR PETH,
VIJAYAPUR.
13. SHANTAWWA W/O GURAPPA GANUR
AGE:53 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:JORAPUR PETH, VIJAYAPUR.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VEERANGOUDA MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI KRUPA SAGAR PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2(A TO C);
R3, R4, R5 TO R11)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND
DECREE DATED 27/07/2016, PASSED IN R.A.No.48/2013 ON
THE FILE OF THE COURT OF I ADDL.DISTRICT JUDGE
VIJAYPUR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE
JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 18/01/2013, PASSED IN
O.S.NO.284/1999 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL.SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE BIJAPUR.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Today i.e., 22.11.2018 learned counsels appearing for the parties have filed a compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure. The parties are present before the Court. They have been identified by their respective counsels. Only respondent No.6- 7 Chandappa Ramappa @ Ramachandra Bandi and respondent No.11-Sushilabai W/o Laxman Sanglikar were not present. The learned counsel who is appearing for respondent Nos.6 and 11 has filed the affidavit signed by the parties stating that both were suffering from paralysis and they are unable to appear before the Court, but they have signed the compromise petition and they have no objection for settling the matter. In respect of other parties are concerned, they are present before the Court and they are identified by their respective counsel.
2. One Smt. Putalabai W/o Krishnappa Uppar @ Ganur and Devadas S/o Dhareppa Bandenavar have filed original suit in O.S.No.284/1999 for partition and separate possession and another suit O.S.No.166/2004 filed by Smt. Parvati W/o Kallappa Uppar @ Patil and others filed suit for partition in respect of suit schedule properties. The suit schedule properties are same in 8 both the suits. The II-Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Bijapur, has clubbed both the suits and passed the common judgment dated 18.01.2013 as follows:
"The suit of the plaintiff in O.S.No.284/1999 is partly decreed. Plaintiff No.1a is entitled 1/6th share in the suit schedule properties.
Defendant No.5 is also entitled 1/6th share in the suit properties if she paid necessary Court fee.
Suit of the plaintiffs in O.S.No.166/2004 is partly decreed. Plaintiff Nos.1, 2, 3(a) to (i) entitled 1/6th share each in the suit properties bearing CTS No.1496/2, 1494/B, 1493/B and RS No.544/2 measuring 8 acres 24 guntas of Mahalbagayat and 475 measuring 17 acres 26 guntas situated in Kasaba and prayer in respect of other properties is rejected.
Draw preliminary decree accordingly. No costs.
9
Keep the original judgment in
O.S.No.248/1999 and the copy of the
judgment in O.S.No.166/2004."
3. Being aggrieved by the same, Gurappa, who is appellant in regular second appeal has filed R.A.Nos.48 and 47 of 2013 challenging both the judgments and decree passed in O.S.Nos.284/1999 and 166/2004. The first appellate Court dismissed the appeals. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant has preferred the present appeals.
4. Today i.e., 22.11.2018 learned counsels appearing for the parties have filed a compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure, reporting the compromise entered into between the appellant and respondents stating that they have compromised the matter amicably. Both parties have stated that after having understood the contents of the compromise petition which was 10 explained to them in Kannada language they have affixed their signatures voluntarily without any force or threat, coercion. They have also stated that out of their own free will and volition they have admitted the execution of compromise petition and affixed their signatures.
5. Learned Advocates appearing for the parties in token of having identified the parties present before the Court have also affixed their signatures to the compromise petition.
6. The compromise petition is taken on record, which reads as under:
1) That the respondent Nos.1 to 3 namely Parvati, Rukmawwa, Sankawwa had filed suit for partition and separate possession i.e. O.S.No.166/2004 in respect of the suit schedule properties i.e. schedule 1 and 2 properties, so also the Putalabai and her alleged adopted son Devdas has filed suit 11 O.S.No.284/1999 for partition and separate possession against the appellant and other persons in respect of schedule properties, both the cases were clubbed together and common judgment was passed granting 1/6th share to plaintiff No.1(a) i.e., Devadas and defendant No.5 i.e. Shantawwa was also granted 1/6th share in the suit schedule properties and some of the properties were not given share.
2) In O.S.No.284/1999 1/6th share was given to plaintiff No.1(a) Devdas and defendant No.5 was also given 1/6th share in suit schedule properties in O.S.No.166/2004 the suit was partly decreed plaintiff No.1, 2, 3(a) to 3(i) were granted 1/6th share each in CTS No.1496/2, 1494/B, 1493/B and RS No.544/2 8 acres 24 guntas and Sy.No.475 17 acres 26 guntas and in respect of other properties it was rejected.
3) The appellant filed R.A.No.48/2013 and R.A.No.47/2013, the appellate Court dismissed the same, hence, this second appeal is filed.12
4) During the pendency of the above regular second appeal the appellants and respondents have compromised the matter at the advise of elder members in the family and the respondents have no claim in the suit schedule properties. It is submitted that the suit schedule properties are the properties belonging to the appellant.
5) The respondents on the advise of elder members in the family have compromised the matter stating that they have no right or interest in the suit schedule properties, it is only the appellant who is the absolute owner and possessor of the suit schedule properties.
He has himself acquired the property and the suit schedule properties Schedule-I and II absolutely belongs to the appellant. The respondents have no claim in the suit schedule properties.
6) The respondents are well settled and on the advise of elders in the family the appellant has paid substantial amount to the respondents. 13
7) In view of the compromise between the parties the appellant can get all the properties in their name for which the respondents have no objections or claim in the property. The compromise is entered between the parties after knowing the full consequences and with consciousness and consent the compromise is entered between the parties.
8) In view of this compromise petition the appellant is absolute owner and possessor of schedule I and schedule II properties. The judgment and decree of the both the Courts below may kindly be modified in terms of joint compromise petition.
7. The said compromise petition is accepted. In terms of the compromise petition, both the appeals are disposed off.
8. The respective counsels are directed to produce the zerox copies of the Identity Cards of the parties, except respondent Nos.6 and 11. 14
9. The Registry is hereby directed to draw the decree in terms of the compromise petition filed under Order 23 Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure.
Sd/-
JUDGE sdu