Karnataka High Court
Sayed Lukman Hakeem vs Noorjahan Begum W/O. S Abdul Latif Anjum on 20 July, 2016
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda
Bench: A.N.Venugopala Gowda
:1:
I N T H E H IG H COUR T O F K A R N A T A K A
DH A RW AD BENCH
DA TED T H I S T H E 2 0 T H D A Y O F JU L Y 2 0 1 6
BEFO R E
T H E H ON'BLE M R . JUS T I C E A .N . VENUGO P A L A GOWDA
R . S . A . NO . 1 0 0 3 6 0 /2 0 1 4
BE TWEEN:
S A Y ED LU K M A N H A K E EM
S/O . L A T E A S A Y ED A L A M S A B
AG E: 5 3 Y E A R S ,
R /O . BEH I ND O LD BUS S T A ND,
K O T T A L R O AD , K A M P L I PO S T , H O S PE T T Q ,
D IS T : BE L L A R Y
... APPELLAN T
(B Y S R I S A T H I S H .M .S . , A D VOC A T E . )
A ND
1. NOO R J A H A N BEGUM
W/O. S A BDU L L A T I F A N JUM
AG E: 5 8 Y E A R S ,
R /O . A R A V I ND N A G A R , 2 2 N D W A RD ,
HOS PE T P O . & TQ , D I S T : BE L L A R Y
2. ZA IBUNN IS S A BEGUM @ S A J J A D BEGUM
W/O. L A T E S H E K S H A V A L I
AG E: 5 8 Y E A R S ,
R /O . O P P . TO P A T E L E LEC T R O N I CS
N A V Y A S H R EE N AGA R A ,
DH A NDEL I , K A R WA R
. . . R ES PO NDEN TS
(B Y S R I S A N TO S H B M A NE , AD VOC A T E . )
T H I S R EGU L A R S ECOND A P P E A L I S F I L ED
UNDE R S EC T I O N 1 0 0 O F C PC , P R A Y I NG TO S E T
A S IDE T H E I M PUGNED JUDGMEN T A ND DEC REE
:2:
DA TED 5 . 8 . 2 0 1 3 , P A S S ED I N O .S .NO. 6 5 / 2 0 1 2 , B Y
T H E ADD L . S EN I O R C I V I L JUDGE A ND J M FC ,
HOS PE T , BE I NG CON F I R M ED I N T H E JUDGMEN T A ND
DEC R EE D A TED 24 . 2 . 2 0 1 4 , P A S SED IN
R . A .NO . 5 0 0 5 / 2 0 1 3 , B Y T H E I I I ADDL . D I S T R I C T A ND
SESS IO NS JUDGE, BA L L A R I , E T C ., .
T H I S A P P E A L COM I NG ON FO R A D M I S S IO N ,
T H I S D A Y , T H E COU R T DE L I V E R ED T H E FO L L OW I NG :
JUDGMENT
This appeal is by defendant no.1, in O.S.No.65/2012, on the file of Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hospet. The suit filed for partition and separate possession was decreed by the trial Court and R.A.No.5005/2013 filed in the Court of III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ballari, sitting at Hospet was dismissed. Assailing the said judgments and decrees, this second appeal was filed.
2. The respondents being the sisters of the appellant, at the intervention of well wishers, the parties have entered into an amicable settlement. Learned Advocates appearing on both sides presented a compromise petition under Order 23 :3: Rule 3 of CPC and submitted that the appeal may be disposed of in terms of settlement arrived at by the parties i.e., as recited in the compromise petition filed. Both parties are present before the Court and identified by the learned Advocates. The contents of the compromise petition was explained to the parties by the learned Advocates in Kannada language. The parties admitted the execution of the compromise petition and submitted that the same may be accepted and the appeal be disposed of accordingly.
3. The appellant having agreed to give joint equal share to both the respondents and put the respondents in separate possession, free of charges created, if any, by him, in respect of the suit schedule item no.1, shall deliver half share of suit item no.1 i.e., in land bearing Sy.No.402A/2, measuring 3.81 acres situated at Tekkalakote village of Siraguppa Taluk. The half share of property allotted to the respondents shall be free :4: from all claims and encumbrances and if there is any claim or encumbrance thereon, the appellant shall discharge the same at his cost and risk.
4. The appellant having agreed to give equal share to the respondents and hand over vacant possession in respect of suit item no.2 house property bearing No.70/535/182 situated at 3/2 ward, Tekkalakote village of Siraguppa taluka shall put the respondents in separate possession of their half share in the said house property.
5. The appellant has agreed to pay Rs.15,00,000/- (fifteen lakh rupees) to the respondents jointly i.e., Rs.7,50,000/- (seven lakh fifty thousand rupees) to each of the respondents, within a period of two years and two months from today. The agreed amount shall be paid within the said period. In case of default, the respondents have the right to recover the said amount from the :5: appellant with interest at 9% p.a. i.e., from the date of default till the date of realization.
6. In view of the shares allotted by the appellant to the respondents, as above, the respondents in turn have agreed to give up their claim on the suit schedule item nos.3, 4 and 5 in favour of the appellant. Henceforth, suit item nos.3, 4 and 5 shall be the absolute properties of the appellant.
7. Respondent no.1 having filed FDP No.13/2014, decree therein shall be passed in terms of settlement entered by the parties i.e., making the allotments in favour of the parties as agreed to herein and the said FDP disposed of.
8. Both parties shall appear in the Court of Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Hospet, in FDP No.13/2014 and report the compromise arrived at in this appeal, by placing on record of the said case a copy of this compromise petition and also the judgment and decree passed herein, so as to :6: enable the trial Court to pass the final decree in terms of the mutual agreement and settlement entered into by the parties.
In the result, appeal is allowed in part and the impugned judgments and decrees are modified. There shall be a decree in terms of the settlement arrived at by the parties, as recited in the compromise petition. Parties to bear their respective costs.
S d/-
JUDGE Mrk/-