Karnataka High Court
Sri. Ganapati Subray Hegde vs Smt. Sumangala Kom Ananth Hegde on 19 November, 2013
Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda
Bench: B.Sreenivase Gowda
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA
RSA.No.6000/2011 c/w RSA.No.6001/2011 (DECLN. & PARTN)
RSA.No.6000/2011:
BETWEEN:
1. SRI GANAPATHI SUBRAY HEGDE,
AGED: 39 YEARS, RYOT,
R/O. NAIGAR GRAM,
KALALEMAKKI, TQ: SIRSI.
572 139.
2. SRI SRIDHAR SUBRAY HEGDE,
AGE: 35 YEARS, RYOT,
R/O. NAIGAR GRAM,
KALALEMAKKI, TQ: SIRSI
572 139.
3. SMT PARAMESHWARI @
RADHA GOVIND HEGDE,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. T.V. STATION,
CHOWKIMATH, SIRSI.
572 139.
4. SMT SHANTALA KOM H.R. VISHWAS
AGE: 47 YEARS, HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. HARIDAS LANE, MANNAGUDDE,
MANGALORE-571 249. ... APPELLANTS
:2:
(By Sri SUNIL S. DESAI, ADV. FOR APPELLANTS)
AND
1. SMT. SUMANGALA KOM ANANTH HEGDE,
AGE: 27 YEARS, HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. SIRSI TALUKA MENASI GRAM,
KEREGADDE,
POST: VANALLI-572 137.
2. SOUBHAGYA D/O. SUBRAY HEGDE
AGE: 25 YEARS,
R/O. SIRSI TALUKA NAIGAR GRAM,
KALALEMAKKI-572 137.
3. SUSHEELA KOM SUBRAY HEGDE,
AGED: 52 YEARS, HOUSE HOLD WORK,
R/O. SIRSI TALUKA NAIGAR GRAM,
KALAEMAKKI, POST: KADBAL
572 137.
4. SUBRAY GANAPATHI HEGDE,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS.
RYOT, R/O SIRSI TALUKA NAIGAR
GRAM, KALALEMAKKI,
POST: KADBAL-572 136. ... RESPONDENTS
(By SRI ANANT R. HEGDE, ADV. FOR R1-R3,
R.4 SERVED)
THIS RSA IS FILED U/S 100 OF CPC PRAYING TO
SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED IN
R.A.NO.537/2009 DATED 5.8.2011 ON THE FILE OF THE
FAST TRACK COURT, SIRSI, AND THE JUDGMENT AND
DECREE IN O.S.92/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL
JUDGE (SR.DN), SIRSI, DATED 1.8.2009, AND ETC.
:3:
IN RSA.6001/2011:
BETWEEN
1. SRI GANAPATHI SUBRAY HEGDE
AGE: 39 YEARS, RYOT.
R/O. NAIGAR GRAM,
KALALEMAKKI,
TQ: SIRSI-572 139.
2. SRI SRIDHAR SUBRAY HEGDE
AGED: 35 YEARS, RYOT.
R/O. NAIGAR GRAM,
KALALEMAKKI,
TQ: SIRSI-572 139.
3. SMT PARAMESHWARI @ RADHA GOVIND HEGDE,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. T.V. STATION,
CHOWKIMATH,
SIRSI-572 139.
DIST: KARWAR
4. SMT. SHANTALA KOM H.R. VISHWAS
AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. HARIDAS LANE, MANNAGUDDE,
MANGALORE-571 249. ... APPELLANTS
(By Sri SUNIL S. DESAI ADV. FOR APPELLANTS)
AND
1. SMT. SUMANGALA KOM ANANTH HEGDE,
AGE: 27 YEARS, HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. SIRSI TALUKA MENASI GRAM,
KEREGADDE,
POST: VANALLI-572 137.
:4:
2. SOUBHAGYA D/O. SUBRAY HEGDE
AGE: 25 YEARS,
R/O. SIRSI TALUKA NAIGAR GRAM,
KALALEMAKKI-572 137.
3. SUSHEELA KOM SUBRAY HEGDE,
AGED: 52 YEARS, HOUSE HOLD WORK,
R/O. SIRSI TALUKA NAIGAR GRAM,
KALAEMAKKI, POST: KADBAL-572 137.
4. SUBRAY GANAPATHI HEGDE,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS.
RYOT, R/O SIRSI TALUKA NAIGAR
GRAM, KALALEMAKKI,
POST: KADBAL-572 136. ... RESPONDENTS
(By SRI ANANT R. HEGDE, ADV. FOR R1-R3,
R.4 SERVED)
THIS RSA IS FILED U/S 100 OF CPC PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED IN
R.A.NO.538/2009 DATED 5.8.2011 ON THE FILE OF THE FAST
TRACK COURT, SIRSI, AND THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN
O.S.133/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN),
SIRSI, DATED 1.8.2009, AND ETC.
THESE RSAs COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Defendants 2 to 5 in the suit OS.No.133/2002 have filed these appeals challenging the concurrent judgments and decrees passed by the courts below in O.S.92.2002 & RA.537/2009 and in O.S.133/2002 and RA.538/09, respectively.
:5:
2. During the pendency of these appeals, the parties have compromised the matter and have filed a detailed compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC in RSA.6001/2011.
3. On behalf of appellants, appellants 1 and 2 were personally present before Court and they admitted the execution of compromise petition and signed the compromise petition on their behalf and also on behalf of appellants 3 and 4 as their General Power of Attorney Holders. A copy of the General Power of Attorney is enclosed along with the compromise petition.
4. On behalf of Respondents, Respondent No.2 Smt.Soubhagya who is plaintiff No.2 in the suit was present before Court personally and she admitted the execution of the compromise petition on her behalf and also on behalf of respondents 1 and 3 who are plaintiffs 1 and 3 in the suits as their Power of Attorney Holder, and she signed the compromise petition on her behalf and also :6: on behalf of respondents 1 and 3. One Dattatreya Gajanan Hegde as the GPA holder of respondent No.4 Subraya Ganapati Bhat-1st defendant in the suit was present and he admitted the execution of compromise petition and signed the same on behalf of respondent No.4.
5. The terms of the compromise were read over to the parties in Kannada language which is known to them and in which language they have filed the compromise petition. All the parties have admitted the execution of compromise petition and have understood the terms and conditions of the compromise petition. They have stated that they have entered into this compromise out of their free will and volition and there is no fraud, misrepresentation, undue influence or coercion in arriving at this compromise.
6. The parties as well as the learned Counsel appearing for the parties pray the court to dispose of the :7: appeal RSA.6001/2011 in terms of the above compromise petition and to dismiss RSA.6000/2011 as withdrawn.
The compromise petition is placed on record.
7. Accordingly, RSA.6001/2011 is disposed of in terms of the compromise petition which is ordered to be treated as part of this order and office to draw final decree in terms of the compromise petition.
RSA.6000/2011 is dismissed as withdrawn.
SD/-
JUDGE .sub/-