SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Kar) 1340

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
Aravind Kumar, Shivashankar Amarannavar, JJ.
J. Venkatesh - Appellant
Versus
Anasuya - Respondent
Regular First Appeal No. 1118 of 2020
Decided On : 16-10-2020

Advocates Appeared:
K.S. Chandrahasa, Advocate, A.C. Patil, Advocate

The voluntary and unconditional agreement between the parties in a compromise petition can lead to the disposal of an appeal and the substitution of the original judgment and decree with the terms specified in the compromise.

Headnote:

Compromise - Declaration and Injunction - The court accepted the compromise petition between the parties, where the appellant agreed to deliver vacant possession of the property to the respondent within a specified time, and the respondent agreed to give time to the appellant to vacate the property. The court directed the registry to draw up a decree in terms of the compromise petition and issued instructions for the refund of court fees to the parties.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant challenged the judgment and decree passed in a suit for declaration and injunction, which came to be decreed in favor of the plaintiff, declaring them as the absolute owner of the property and directing the defendant to vacate and surrender possession to the plaintiff.

Finding of the Court:

The court accepted the compromise petition between the parties and disposed of the appeal in terms of the compromise. The court also directed the registry to draw up a decree in line with the compromise and issued instructions for the refund of court fees to the parties.

Issues: The main issue was the acceptance of the compromise petition and its implications on the appeal and the original judgment and decree.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the voluntary and unconditional agreement between the parties in the compromise petition, which led to the disposal of the appeal and the substitution of the original judgment and decree with the terms specified in the compromise.

Final Decision: The appeal was disposed of in terms of the compromise petition, and the court issued instructions for the refund of court fees to the parties. The application filed for stay was rejected as it did not survive for consideration.

JUDGMENT

Aravind Kumar, J. - This appeal is filed by the unsuccessful defendant challenging the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.8236/2015 dated 01.09.2020 by the 20th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, whereunder suit filed for declaration and injunction came to be decreed and plaintiff came to be declared as the absolute owner of schedule property and defendant has been directed to vacate the schedule property and surrender vacant possession of same to the plaintiff within one moth from the said date.

2. Learned advocates appearing for parties on previous date of hearing had submitted that they would be reporting settlement by today. Hence, at their request, matter came to be adjourned and a compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC has been filed on 14.10.2020. Terms agreed to between parties under the compromise arrived at reads as under:

    "1. The appellant had respondent unconditionally withdraw the allegations made by them against each other in the suit and appeal.

      2. The appellant agree to deliver vacant possession of the suit schedule premises to the respondent/plaintiff within 9 months from 01.11.2020.

        3. The respondent/plaintiff agree to give 9 months time to the appellant/defendant as stated above to vacate and deliver the vacant possession of the suit schedule property on or before 01.08.2021.

          4. In view of the amicable settlement out of court the appellant prays to refund the court fee paid on the appeal to the appellant so also the court fee paid by the plaintiff in the suit in O.S.No.8236/2015 to the plaintiff.

            5. The terms of the compromise petition have been translated to Kannada and explained to both the parties and after understanding the terms of the compromise petition and both the parties have signed the compromise petition on their own volition without any compulsion."

            3. Both parties have appeared through video conference and they agree and admit the execution of compromise petition. They have also submitted that after their respective learned advocates read over the contents of the compromise petition and explained to them in Kannada language, they have affixed their signatures to the compromise petition voluntarily without any force, thereat or coercion.

            4. Learned Advocates appearing for parties have identified the parties, who have digitally appeared. They have also submitted before the Court that during the course of the day, photo identity cards of parties (photocopies) issued by statutory authorities would be uploaded for being placed in this appeal. Their submission and undertaking is placed on record. In token of having identified the parties who have digitally appeared, learned advocates have also affixed their signatures to the compromise petition. Parties, who have appeared through video conference have admitted that compromise is entered into voluntarily out of their own free will and volition. In that view of matter, there is no impediment for this court to accept the compromise and accordingly, it is accepted.

            5. Respondent has also submitted that she is not insisting for payment of rents or damages for the period to which appellant has agreed to occupy the suit schedule property till he vacates and she has also consented for court fee paid on appeal memo to be refunded to the appellant. Appellant has agreed that court fee paid by respondent - plaintiff before trial court can be refunded to the respondent.

            6. In light of the aforestated facts, we proceed to pass the following:

              ORDER

                a. Appeal stands disposed off in terms of compromise petition and judgment and decree passed by the 20th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City dated 01.09.2020 in O.S.No.8236/2015 dated 01.09.2020, shall stand substituted to the terms specified in the compromise petition entered into between parties.

                  b. Registry is directed to draw-up decree in terms of compromise petition.

                    c. Registry of this court is directed to issue cheque for Rs.2,10,005/- which is the co

                        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                        1
                        2
                        3
                        4
                        5
                        6
                        7
                        8
                        9
                        10
                        11
                        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                        supreme today icon
                        logo-black

                        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                        Please visit our Training & Support
                        Center or Contact Us for assistance

                        qr

                        Scan Me!

                        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                        whatsapp-icon Back to top