##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16989-DB RFA No. 415 of 2017

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 415 OF 2017 (DEC)

BETWEEN:

SMT. SATHYAVATHI, W/O. SRINIVAS REDDY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

RESIDING AT HALANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,

CARMALERAM POST, VARTUR HOBLI,

BENGALURU - 560 035.

…APPELLANT (BY MS. NOVEDITHA R., ADVOCATE FOR

Digitally SMT. ANUPAMA M.V. ADVOCATE)

signed by AND:

REKHA R Location:

High Court G. SRINIVASA, of Karnataka S/O. GOPALAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NO.20/3, 1^ST CROSS,

MADIVALA RING ROAD, VARTHUR HOBLI,

BENGALURU - 560 035.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA K., ADVOCATE)

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16989-DB RFA No. 415 of 2017

HC-KAR

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:20.10.2016 PASSED IN OS NO.3428/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE 24^TH ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY,

DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND INJUNCTION.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

The present appeal has been filed under the

provisions of Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, impugning the judgment and award dated 20.10.2016

passed in O.S.No.3428/2013 instituted by the appellant.

2. The suit came to be dismissed by the impugned

judgment and decree. During the course of pendency of this appeal, the parties have settled their disputes amicably outside the Court and they have filed memo

under Order XXII Rule 3 r/w Section 151 of the CPC.

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16989-DB RFA No. 415 of 2017

HC-KAR

3. The parties are present before this Court who

have been duly identified by their respective counsel representing them before this Court. The terms of the compromise as stated in the memo dated 25.02.2026

reads as under:

"03. That in pursuance of the said settlement, the Appellant and her sons who are confirming witnesses had executed a Deed of cancellation of sale deed on 14.08.2025 vide document No.BHM-1-04109/2025- 26 Book No.1 before the Sub-registrar Jayanagar (Bommanahalli) Bangalore, whereby cancelling the sale deed dated 21/05/2008 registered as document No.948/2007-08 whereby appellant has released her rights, title and interest over the suit schedule property in favour of the respondent herein by confirming rights, title and interest of the Respondent. Thus, the respondent herein became the absolute owner in possession of the suit schedule

property.

04. That the parties have now resolved all their disputes fully and finally and there is nothing more left to be

adjudicated.

05. The Appellant undertakes and prays this Hon'ble Court may be please to handover all the original and certified copies of the documents pertaining to the suit schedule property produced by her in the trial

court to the respondent.

06. That the present compromise is voluntary, without any coercion, undue influence, or misrepresentation,

and both parties are bound by its terms.

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16989-DB RFA No. 415 of 2017

HC-KAR

Wherefore both the parties prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:

a) Record the compromise in terms of this petition;

b) In lieu of the Appellant executing the cancellation deed of sale and releasing the rights in favour of the respondent, he is sole and absolute owner of the suit

schedule property.

c) Dispose of the appeal accordingly; and d) Direct the registry to return the original documents

produced by both parties to the respondent in Trial Court in O.S.No.3428/2013.

e) Direct the registry to refund the entire Court fee paid by the Appellant.

f) Pass such other order as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity."

4. The parties state that they have entered into

compromise without any undue influence, coercion, etc., and they understand the terms of the comp