IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.2011 OF 2023 (PAR)

BETWEEN:

SRI NARASIMHAMURTHY @ NARASIMHAIHA S/O LATE R RAMA NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT NO. 62 YEARS, R/AT NO. 8/24, 2^ND CROSS, KEMPAPURA AGRAHARA, BENGALURU - 560023.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. VIJAYA SHEKARA GOWDA V., ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by AND:

RAKSHA Location: 1. SMT. R. CHANDRAMMA High Court W/O VENKATESH of Karnataka AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, NO. 51, 10TH CROSS, (LEFT SIDE)

CHOWLUERU PALYA, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 023.

2. SRI. R. RAMESH S/O LATE R. RAMA NARASIMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 3. SRI. NAVEEN S/O LATE INDIRAMMA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/A.30/1, C/O RAMESH, KOTE 'A' BEEDI, OPP. VANIVILAS HOSPITAL, NEXT TO MYTHRI MEDICALAS, K. R. MARKET, BENGALURU - 560 023.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KEERTHI HEGDE, ADV. FOR R1;

SRI. SHERVIL ADAPPA, ADV. FOR R2;

SRI. SAITH C.V., ADV. FOR R3)

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.08.2023 PASSED IN OS NO. 162/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE LX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)

This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 17.08.2023 passed by the LX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH 61) in O.S.No.162/2017.

2. During the pendency of this appeal, the parties have resolved the dispute amicably and filed a Compromise Petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

3. Learned counsel for the parties submits that the appellant as well as the respondents are present. The parties are identified by their respective counsel.

4. We have perused the terms of the Compromise Petition. We are satisfied that the terms of the Compromise Petition are as per law and are not opposed to public policy.

5. The terms of the Compromise Petition reads as under:

"COMPROMISE PETITION UNDER ORDER 23 RULE 3 R/W SECTION 151 CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE The L.R's of Appellant and Respondents, arrayed as parties in the above Regular First Appeal, submit this Joint Compromise Petition praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to record the compromise arrived at between them and dispose of the appeal in terms of the compromise set out hereunder:

1. The Respondent No.1 herein had filed an Original Suit bearing O.S.No.162 of 2017 before the Hon'ble Trial Court at LX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, at Bengaluru (CCH 61), seeking the relief of partition and separate possession of half share in the suit schedule property by metes and bounds. The Respondent No.1 had also sought a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants in the said suit and any persons claiming through them, from alienating or creating any charge over the suit schedule property and from putting up any construction in the suit schedule property. The parties to the said suit, being the Appellant and the Respondents herein, are Hindus governed by the Hindu Mitakshara School of law.

2. One Sri N. Rama Narasimhaiah is the Propositor of the family. During his lifetime, he was employed as a Police Inspector and had purchased the house property bearing Old No.8, presently No.24, 2^nd Cross, which is more fully described in the Schedule 'A' hereunder, on 23.04.1962 for a valuable sale consideration by obtaining a loan from the Central Co-operative Bank, Bengaluru. The said Sri N. Rama Narasimhaiah had four children, namely, Sri Narasimha Murthy Narasimhaiah (the Appellant in this case), Smt. R. Chandramma (Respondent No.1). Sri. R. Ramesh (Respondent No. 2) and one Smt. Late Indiramma (mother of Respondent No.3- Sri. Naveen). These ind