RSA/3110/2006 of SRI T KRISHNAPPA S/O DODDATHIMMAIAH Vs SRI THAYAPPA S/O MUNINARASAPPA on 11 September 2026

JUDGEMENT

& DECREE DATED 29.6.2006 PASSED IN R.A.NO.6/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.), DODDABALLAPUR AND ETC.

IN RSA NO.3110/2006 BETWEEN:

1. SRI T KRISHNAPPA

SINCE DEAD BY LRS

1(A) SMT. LAKSHMI W/O LATE MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

1(B) SRI MANOJ S/O LATE MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS

1(C) SMT. LAVANYA D/O LATE MANJUNATHA

HC-KAR

1(D) SRI GANESH S/O LATE MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

APPELLANT NO.1(A) TO (D) ARE R/AT 70/29, ‘A’ BLOCK SAHAKAR NAGAR BATARAYANAPURA MAIN ROAD BANGALORE

1(E) SMT. NIRMALA D/O LATE T KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

1(F) SMT. SARASWATHI D/O LATE T KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

APPELLANT NO.1(E) AND (F) R/AT GOWDAHALLI MADHURE HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DIST.

1(G) SRI NARAYANASWAMY S/O LATE T KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT GOWDAHALLI MADHURE HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DIST.

1(H) SMT. SUBHARATHNAMA W/O LATE T KRISHNAPPA

1(I) SMT. SARALA W/O CHANDRASHEKAR

HC-KAR

D/O LATE T KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS

1(J) SRI SHIVRAJ S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS

THE APPELLANT NO.1(H) TO (J) ARE R/AT GOWDAHALLI MADHURE HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DIST.

...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SUNIL S RAO, ADVOCATE FOR SRI T SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE FOR P’SD A1(H-J); V/O DT.13.01.2023, P’SD A1(A TO G) ARE TRANSPOSED AS R3 TO R9)

AND:

1. SRI THAYAPPA S/O MUNINARASAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LRS

1(A) SRI NAGESH S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

1(B) SRI RAVI S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

1(C) SMT. MURTHY D/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

THE RESPONDENT NOS.1(A) TO (C) ARE R/AT GOWDAHALLI VILLAGE

HC-KAR

MADHURE HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DIST.

2. SRI CHIKKATHIMMAIAH S/O DODDATHIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS R/A GOWDAHALLI VILLAGE MADHURE HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK ANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT

3. SMT. LAKSHMI W/O LATE MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

4. SRI MANOJ S/O LATE MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS

5. SMT. LAVANYA D/O LATE MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS

6. SRI GANESH S/O LATE MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

RESPONDENT NO.3 TO 6 ARE R/AT 70/29, ‘A’ BLOCK SAHAKAR NAGAR BATARAYANAPURA MAIN ROAD BANGALORE

7. SMT. NIRMALA D/O LATE T KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

HC-KAR

8. SMT. SARASWATHI D/O LATE T KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

RESPONDENT NO.7 TO 8 ARE R/AT GOWDAHALLI MADHURE HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT

9. SRI NARAYANASWAMY S/O LATE T KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT GOWDAHALLI MADHURE HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT (RESPONDENT NO.2-9 EX-PARTE)

...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI V VISWANATH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R1(A-C) R2 SERVED V/O DT.17.02.2023, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R3 TO R9 H/S)

THIS RSA IS FILED U/S.100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED 29.06.2006 PASSED IN R.A.NO.7/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.), DODDABALLAPUR AND ETC.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

In R.S.A.No.3111/2006 The learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo along with a copy of the amended appeal memo and the same is taken on record.

2. The counsel for the legal representatives of deceased appellant No.1 is present. The counsel for respondent No.1(a) is also present. On behalf of respondent No.1(b) and

(c) , the counsel for respondent No.1(a) has filed the power of attorney. Respondent Nos.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 are not present before the Court.

3. The counsel for the appellant would submit that respondent Nos.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 have executed a release deed in favour of appellant No.1(a)-Smt. Subharathanamma. The said submission is taken on record. In R.S.A.No.3110/2006

4. The counsel for legal representatives of appellant is also present. Respondent No.1 is no more and his legal representatives i.e., respondent No.1(a) to (c) are present.

HC-KAR

5. The counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that respondent Nos.2 to 9 have already executed a release deed in favour of appellant No.1(a). The said submission is taken on record.

6. Now, the parties have filed the compromise petition before this Court. The parties have understood the terms of the compromise. Hence, compromise petition is accepted. Along with compromise petition, sketch is also annexed. Accordingly, the appeals are disposed of in terms of the compromise petition.

7. Registry is directed to draw the decree in terms of the compromise petition.

Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

SN