Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
H.T.Narendra Prasad
Muralidhar Reddy, Since Dead By His Lr’s – Appellant
Versus
R.Nagaraj, Since Dead By His Lr’s – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the appeal against a previous judgment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. details regarding the compromise agreement between parties. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT :
H.T. Narendra Prasad, J.
This appeal is filed by the defendants challenging the judgment and decree dated 30.10.2012 passed by the XXIV Additional City Civil and Judge, Bangalore (CCH-6) in O.S.No.1282/2007, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiffs has been decreed.
2. On service of notice, the plaintiff appeared through counsel. The appellant/defendant and the respondent/plaintiff are dead. Hence, their legal representatives are brought on record. Now, the parties have settled the matter and they have filed a compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC. The compromise petition is signed by the parties. The parties are present before the Court. They and their signatures are identified by their respective learned advocates. They state that they have entered into the settlement out of their volition and without any duress from anybody and they have settled the matter in terms of the compromise petition. The compromise petition is extracted below:
“APPLICATION UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 3 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1
Settlement agreements made voluntarily and without duress are enforceable, allowing for confirmation of ownership and resolving disputes amicably.
The court upheld the voluntary compromise between parties regarding partition claims and confirmed the modification of the decree, emphasizing the absence of coercion and mutual satisfaction with the....
A binding compromise under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure prevents parties from raising further claims related to the settled issues.
A mutual compromise resolving property disputes is valid and enforceable under the Code of Civil Procedure, reflecting parties' free will in legal matters.
A compromise between parties, if accepted by the court, is binding and results in the cessation of claims while outlining property rights and financial settlements.
The court confirmed that a compromise in a partition case is valid if voluntarily entered without coercion, facilitating expedient resolution through final decree proceedings.
Compromise decrees are binding unless legally challenged, and mere allegations of fraud do not invalidate established agreements without sufficient proof or a court ruling to the contrary.
The court has the discretion to permit parties to settle their disputes in the interest of justice, and a compromise/settlement agreement can be allowed if found to be legal.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
