IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1171 OF 2014 BETWEEN:

1. SAJJAPPA, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS, 1(a) SMT.GANGAMMA, W/O LATE SAJJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS

1(b) SOWBHAGYA, D/O LATE SAJJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, 1(c) VEERANNA, S/O SAJJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, 1(d) RAMESH, S/O LATE SAJJAPPA, Digitally signed by AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S ALL ARE AGRICULTURISTS, R/AT KANCHIPURA VILLAGE, Location: High MATHODU HOBLI, Court of Karnataka HOSADURGA TALUK-577 533, CHITRADURGA DIST.

…APPELLANTS [BY SRI G. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADVOCATE]

AND:

1. MALLIKARJUNAPPA, S/O RAMADASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, 2. PUTTAIAH, S/O RAMADASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, 3. THIPPESWAMY, S/O RAMADASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, ALL ARE AGRICULTURISTS, R/AT KANCHIPURA VILLAGE, MATHODU HOBLI, HOSADURGA TALUK-577 533, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENTS [BY SRI H. DAYANANDA SARASWATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 (a-c);

SRI V. MANJUNATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R3;

R2, R3(a) & PROPOSED R1(d) - ARE SERVED]

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.04.2014 PASSED IN R.A.NO.56/2013 ON THE FILE OF ITINERARY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HOSADURGA, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.06.2013 PASSED IN O.S.NO.120/2007 ON THE FILE OF ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, HOSADURGA.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

ORAL JUDGMENT

Challenging judgment and decree dated 26.04.2014 passed by Itinerary Senior Civil Judge, Hosadurga, in R.A.no.56/2013, this appeal is filed by plaintiff.

2. It is submitted, suit was filed for declaration of plaintiff as owner of suit schedule property and against registered Will dated 28.12.1988 and permanent injunction, etc. Suit was dismissed. In R.A.no.56/2013, judgment and decree passed by trial Court was confirmed.

3. It is submitted, during pendency of appeal, there was settlement between parties with intervention of mediation by elders and panchas resulting in partition between parties. Same are recorded in memorandum appended to this compromise petition. It is submitted, from date of settlement, parties are in possession of properties mentioned in respective schedules and therefore, submitted that appeal may be disposed of in terms of compromise.

4. Terms of compromise reads as under:

"Appellants and the Respondents submit as below:-

1. The legal representatives of the plaintiffs in OS No.120/2007 on the file of the Add. Civil Judge & JMFC, Hosadurga are the Appellants in the above Appeal. Respondents No.1 to 3 in the above appeal are the defendants No.1 to 3 in the said suit. Original plaintiff and Defendants No.1 to 3 are full brothers being the sons of Ramadasappa.

2. Plaintiff filed OS No.120/2007 for a declaration that, plaintiff is the owner of the suit schedule properties in pursuance to an unregistered Partition Deed dated 10/05/1984 entered into between the plaintiff and the Defendants and for a declaration that, the Registered WILL dated 28/12/1998 said to have been executed by the mother of the plaintiff and Defendants is a sham and bogus document and the same is void. Plaintiff also sought for consequential permanent injunction.

3. The Trial Court dismissed the suit by the Judgment dated 18/06/2013 and the Itinerary Senior Civil Judge at Hosdurga dismissed RA No.56/2013 filed by the Appellants, by the Judgment dated 26/04/2014. Being aggrieved, the legal representatives of plaintiffs have filed the above Regular Second Appeal.

4. During the pendency of the above appeal, the subject matter of suit was amicably settled between the Appellants and Respondents through the intervention and mediation by the elders and the panchas. A partition was effected between the Appellants and Respondents. Said partition effected between Appellants and the Respondents in the presence of Panchas was later