Karnataka High Court
Neelawa, W/O.Bhimappa Dhupdal vs Chambanna Paramshetti Patil, By Lrs on 25 June, 2022
HIGH COURT LEGA L SERVI CES COMMITTEE
DHARWAD BEN CH
BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BEN CH
DATED THIS THE 25 T H DAY OF JUN E, 2022
CONCILIAT ORS PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M .G.S.KA MAL
AND
SHRI M.C.HUKKERI, MEMBER
R.S.A . NO.5698 OF 2009 (MV)
LOK ADA LAT NO.821/ 2022
BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Neelavva W/o. Bhimappa Dhupadal
@ Dhupalar Since deceased by her LR's
1A. Shri Basavaraj S/o. Bhimappa Dhupadal
@ Dhupalar, Age: 45 years, Occ: Agriculture,
R/o: Shivapur (Konnur)- 591 231,
Tal: Gokak, Dist: Belagavi
2. Smt Sattewa W/o. Bharamappa Ankalagi
Age: 58 years, Occ: Household & Agriculture,
R/o: Godachinmalki - 591 231,
Tal: Gokak, Dist: Belagavi
3. Smt. Allawa W/o. Shivarudrappa @ Shivagoudappa
Patil Age: 55 years, Occ: Household & Agriculture,
R/o: Shirdhon, Tal: Hukkeri, Dist: Belagavi
Smt. Bhagawa W/o. Shivalingappa Gadigal
(Died during pendency of appeal before Lower
Appellate court. Appellants 1 to 3 are her LR's)
.... Appellants
(Smt. Sunanda P Patil, Advocate)
2
AND:
Shri Chambanna Paramshetti Patil
Since deceased by his LR's
1. Smt Shantakka W/o. Chambanna Patil
Age: 58 years, Occ: Household
R/o: Adibatti- 591 231
Tal: Gokak, Dist: Belagavi
2. Shri Paratgouda S/o Chambanna Patil
Since deceased by his LRs.
2A. Smt. Sangeeta W/o. Paratgouda Patil
Age: 46 years, occupation: Household work,
R/o: Adibatti -591 218
Taluka: Gokak, District: Belagavi
2B. Miss. Shivani D/o. Paratgouda Patil
Age: 14 years, occupation: Student
2C. Miss. Shreya D/o. Paratgouda Patil
Age: 12 years, occupation: Student
2D. Master Mallikarjun S/o. Paratgouda Patil
Age: 8 years, occupation: Student
Since Respondents 2B to 2D are minors represented
By their minor guardian-natural mother Respondent no. 2A Smt. Sangeeta W/o. Paratgouda Patil Age: 46 years, occupation: Household work, R/O: Adibatti -591 218 Taluka: Gokak, District: Belagavi
3. Shri Shekhar S/o Chambanna Patil Since deceased by his LRs 3A. Smt Savitri w/o Shekhar @ Chandrashekhar Patil Age: 34 years, occupation: Household work, R/O: Adibatti -591 218 Taluka: Gokak, District: Belagavi 3B. Miss Poornima d/o Shekhar @ Chandrashekhar Patil Age: 10 years, occupation: Student 3 3C. Miss Pragati d/o Shekhar @ Chandrashekhar Patil Age: 9 years, occupation: Student Since Respondents 3B to 3C are minors represented By their minor guardian-natural mother Respondent no. 3A Savitri w/o Shekhar @ Chandrashekhar Patil Age: 34 years, occupation: Household work, R/O: Adibatti -591 218 Taluka: Gokak, District: Belagavi
4. Shri Ishwar S/o Chambanna Patil Age: 26 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Adibatti- 591 231 Tal: Gokak, Dist: Belagavi
5. Smt. Satibalawa W/o Appu Naik Age: 54 years, Occ: Household, R/o: Shivapur (Konnur) 591 231 Tal: Gokak, Dist: Belagavi .... Respondents (Sri.M.L.Vanti and Vinay S Koujalagi, advs., for R.Nos.2(a), 3(a), R.Nos.5,1,) This RSA filed under section 100 R/w Order 42 Rule 1 of the CPC against the judgment and decree dated 19/11/2009 passed in RA.No.14/2002 on the file of the Prl.Civil Judge (Sr.DN), Gokak, dismissing the appeal filed against the Judgment and decree dated 21/12/2001 and decreed passed in O.S.No.265/1993 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn), Gokak, decreeing the suit filed for specific performance of contract.
This MFA coming on for conciliation before the Lok Adalat after being referred by the Court, the following Conciliation Order is passed: 4
CONCILIATION ORDER The parties and their respective counsel are present before this Court and have filed a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 R/w. 151 of CPC. The said compromise petition reads as under:
"COMPROMISE PETITION UNDER ORDER 23 RULE 3 R/W SECTION 151 OF C.P.C.
Herein, the compromise petition on behalf of the appellants and respondents is as under.
1. The appellants and respondents in this case have compromised themselves at the intervention of the Village elders and the members of Lok Adalat and the terms of the compromise entered in to between the appellants and the respondents are as under.
2. The original respondent-plaintiff filed a suit against the appellants and respondent no. 5 in the Court of the Principal Civil Judge Jr. Dn. Gokak in OS 265/1993 for specific performance of contract in respect of the suit lands bearing (i) RS no. 493/1+2A measuring 03 acres 13 guntas assessed at Rs. 03 . 52 (ii) RS no. 456/1+2A/2B/2 measuring 01 acre 28 guntas assessed at Rs. 02 . 86 both situate at Shivapur(Konnur) Taluka: Gokak, Dist: Belagavi. The Principal Civil Judge Jr. Dn. Gokak decreed the suit filed by original respondent-plaintiff. The appellants being aggrieved by the above said judgment and decree preferred an appeal before the Principal Civil Judge Sr. Dn. Gokak in RA 14/2002. The Principal Civil Judge Sr. Dn. Gokak dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants in RA 14/2002. The appellants being aggrieved by the same have preferred this appeal. During the pendency of RA 14/2002 original respondent-plaintiff died and his legal representatives were brought on record as respondents 1A to 5 1D in the said appeal. During the pendency of this appeal appellant no. 1 and respondents 2 & 3 died and their legal representatives are brought on record as appellant no. 1A, respondents 2A to 2D and 3A to 3C respectively. Now the matter is settled and is filing this compromise petition. The terms of the compromise petition are as under:
3. Respondents 1, 2A to 2D, 3A to 3C and 4 received an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) from appellant no. 1A towards earnest money, interest on it and the costs of proceedings of this case before the courts below. By receiving an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) from appellant no. 1A respondents 1, 2A to 2D, 3A to 3C and 4 have relinquished their rights acquired under the judgment and decree passed in OS 265/1993 dated 21.12.2001 passed by the Principal Civil Judge Jr. Dn. Gokak on the strength of agreement of sale dated 06.10.1990 in favour of the appellants and respondent no. 5. Respondents 1, 2A to 2D, 3A to 3C and 4 have no objection to allow this appeal and thereby set aside the judgment and decree dated 21.12.2001 passed in OS 265/1993 by the Principal Civil Judge Jr. Dn. Gokak and confirmed by the judgment and decree dated 19.11.2009 passed by the Principal Civil Judge Sr. Dn. Gokak in RA 14/2002 on the strength of agreement of sale dated 06.10.1990. In view of this compromise respondents 1, 2A to 2D, 3A to 3C and 4 admits that the sale agreement dated 06.10.1990 is not binding on the appellants and respondent no. 5. The present compromise is in the better interest of minor respondents 2B to 2D and 3B & 3C. Respondents 1, 2A to 2D, 3A to 3C and 4 have already handed over the possession of the suit lands to the appellants and respondent no. 5. Respondents 1, 2A to 2D, 3A to 3C and 4 clarifies that they would not claim any right over the suit lands on the strength of sale agreement dated 06.10.1990 in future and also admits that the appellants and respondent no. 5 are the absolute owners of the suit lands. Appellant no. 1A has paid an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) to respondents 1, 2B to 2D and 3B & 3C & 4 through DDs drawn from Canara Bank, Branch Dharwad as shown below:6
Sl. No. Name Amount DD No. Date 1. Respondent no. 1 Rs. 20,000/- 509421 16.06.2022 2. Respondent no. 2A Rs. 10,000/- 509420 16.06.2022 3. Respondent no. 2B Rs. 10,000/- 509479 16.06.2022 4. Respondent no. 2C Rs. 10,000/- 509478 16.06.2022 5. Respondent no. 2D Rs. 10,000/- 509480 16.06.2022 6. Respondent no. 3A Rs. 10,000/- 509425 16.06.2022 7. Respondent no. 3B Rs. 10,000/- 509481 16.06.2022 8. Respondent no. 3C Rs. 10,000/- 509482 16.06.2022 9. Respondent no. 4 Rs. 10,000/- 509422 16.06.2022
towards earnest money, interest on it and the costs of proceedings of this case before the courts below. Therefore they have no objections for allowing the present appeal as per the terms of the compromise petition.
4. The appellants and respondents have to bear their own costs.
5. Accordingly allow this appeal and thereby set aside the judgment and decree dated 21.12.2001 passed in OS 265/1993 by the Principal Civil Judge Jr. Dn. Gokak and confirmed by the judgment and decree dated 19.11.2009 passed by the Principal Civil Judge Sr. Dn. Gokak in RA 14/2002 on the strength of agreement of sale dated 06.10.1990 and decree may kindly be passed in terms of compromise petition in the interest of justice and equity."7
2. Since respondent Nos.2(B) to 2(D) are minors and they are represented by their mother and natural guardian-respondent No.2(A). Similarly respondent Nos.3(B) and 3(C) are minors and they are represented by their mother and natural guardian- respondent No.3(A). Respondent Nos.2(A) and 3(A) have filed application under Order XXXII Rule 7 R/w. Section 151 of CPC seeking permission to compromise the matter on behalf of the minor respondent Nos.2(B) to 2(D), 3(B) and 3(C).
3. The applications filed under Order XXXII Rule 7 of CPC filed by the respondent Nos. 2(A) and 3(A) are taken on record. Accepting the cause shown in the affidavits accompanying the applications, respondent Nos.2(A) and 3(A) are permitted to enter into the compromise petition on behalf of the minor respondent Nos. 2(B) to 2(D) and 3(B) and 3(C). Learned counsel Sri.M.L.Vanti and Sri.Vinay S Koujalagi have filed vakalath for respondents and also filed certificate which is mandatory under the Provision of Order XXXII Rule 7 of CPC.
4. The respondents are also represented by Sri.G.P.Patil, who is a practicing advocate at Gokak, having Registration No.9778 and he is also a brother of the deceased original plaintiff-Sri.Chambanna.
5. We have interacted with the parties and they are aware of the terms of the compromise petition. 8
6. Demand drafts for Rs.1,00,000/- which are referred in detail at para 3 of the compromise petition are handed over today i.e. on 25/6/2022 to the respective parties. Accordingly, the parties have received Demand drafts and affixed their signatures on the compromise petition. We are satisfied with the terms of the compromise petition and also with regard to the interest of the minor children.
7. In that view of the matter, the compromise petition filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 R/w. 151 of CPC is taken on record and the appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise petition.
Registry is directed to draw decree accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
MEMBER VB/-