1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

WRIT PETITION NO.24062 OF 2017 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

SRI. K.A.ANIL KUMAR,

S/O K.MURTHY,

AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

RESIDENT OF ‘ANIL FARMS’,

MARATIKYATHNAHALLI,

JAYAPURA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK

MYSURU

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. BRIJESH KALAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR

SRI. PRASHANT KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . SRI. S. NAGARAJ,

S/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA,

AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,

R/A ‘SAI NANDANA RESIDENCY,

FLAT NO.304,

5TH MAIN, 11TH CROSS,

VIJAYA BANK LAYOUT,

BENGALURU – 560 076.

2 . SMT. TRIPURAMBHA,

W/O SRI S. NAGARAJ,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

R/A ‘SAI NANDANA RESIDENCY,

FLAT NO.304,

5TH MAIN, 11TH CROSS,

VIJAYA BANK LAYOUT,

BENGALURU- 560 076.

3 . SRI. N. SANTHOSH,

S/O SRI. S.NAGARAJ,

AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

R/A ‘SAI NANDANA RESIDENCY,

FLAT NO.304, 5TH MAIN, 11TH CROSS

2

VIJAYA BANK LAYOUT,

BENGALURU – 560 076.

4 . MISS N.SUPRIYA,

D/O S.NAGARAJ,

AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,

R/A ‘SAI NANDANA RESIDENCY,

FLAT NO.304, 5TH MAIN,

11TH CROSS,

VIJAYA BANK LAYOUT,

BENGALURU – 560 076.

5. SMT. CHIKKATHAYAMMA,

D/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA,

AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS,

R/AT NO.1283, HOSPITAL ROAD,

KYATHANAHALLI VILLAGE,

PANDAVAPURA TALUK,

MANDYA DISTRICT

(AMENDMENT CARRY OUT VIDE ORDER DT.16.8.19)

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. D.R.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 – R4

(CP NO.4501/17 & 4502/17));

SRI. S.NAGARAJA, ADVOCATE FOR R5;

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR

THE

ENTIRE

RECORDS

OF

THE

TRAIL

COURT

IN

O.S.NO.725/2015

AND

TO

SCRUTINIZE

THE

SAME;

CALL

FOR

THE

ENTIRE

RECORDS

OF

THE

LOWER

C\APPELLATE COURT IN M.A.NO.84/2016, M.A NO.85/2016 AND

M.A.NO.86/2016 AND TO SCRUTINIZE THE SAME AND ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY

THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

3

ORDER

Petitioner being the plaintiff in an injunctive suit in O.S.

No.725/2015 is at the door steps of the writ court for

assailing three orders all dated 26.04.2017 whereby the

learned III Addl. Sr. Civil Judge, Mysore, has affirmed the

interim protection granted by the learned trial Judge under

Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 in favour of the respondent-

defendants. The respondent nos. 1 to 4 have entered caveat

through their counsel and respondent no.5 has entered

appearance after notice, through her advocate.

2. Petitioner and the respondent nos. 1 to 4 having

settled the lis between them have filed a compromise petition

dated 17.10.2020; learned advocates appearing for the sides

have during video conference identified their respective

parties and their signatures to the petition, as well; a perusal

of the compromise petition shows that it is in the best interest

of the parties thereto and that there is no impediment

whatsoever for this Court putting its seal to the same. The

terms of the settlement incorporated in para 4 of compromise

petition read as under:

4

“1. It is respectfully submitted that the specific

terms of the compromise are as under –

i.

The Petitioner, the Respondents and

the consenting land owners acknowledge

and

agree

that

the

actual

physical

measurement of the suit schedule property

is 33 Acres 11 Guntas (excluding 1 Acre 38

guntas kharab land). As per the agreement

in Kannada the owners are entitled to a

consideration of Rs. 1,06,00,000/- (Rupees

One Crore Six Lakhs Only) per acre and in

registered JDA one 12 X 18 sq mtr site

(commonly read as 40 feet x 60 feet site) for

every 1 Acre of land as “owner’s interest”.

The Petitioner / Developer is required to allot

33.27 number in all, of sites to the 32 land

owners, but the Petitioner / Developer is

allotting in all 34 number of sites to all the

land owners as “owner’s interest”.

ii. The

Respondents

and

the

Consenting Landowners who