Karnataka High Court

RSA/1781/2012 of SRI T VENKATARAVANAPPA Vs SRI T V RAMAKRISHNA REDDY on 16 July 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

CNR: KAHC010363542012 NC: 2026:KHC:36369 RSA No. 1780 of 2012 C/W RSA No. 1781 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1780 OF 2012 (DEC/INJ) C/W REGULAR SECOND APPEAL

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1780 OF 2012 (DEC/INJ)

C/W

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1781 OF 2012 (DEC/INJ)

IN RSA NO.1780/2012:

BETWEEN:

1.

SHRI. T. VENKATARAVANAPPA

S/O LATE CHIKKA VENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS

CHINTAMANI TALUK

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-563 125.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. V. VISWANATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

SHRI. C. NARAYANAPPA

S/O LATE CHIKKAVENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

CHINTAMANI TALUK

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-563 125.

(VIDE ORDER DATED 16.07.2026, R1 IS DELETED)

2.

SHRI. T.V. RAMAMAKRISHNA REDDY

SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS

Digitally signed

by DEVIKA M

Location: HIGH

COURT OF

KARNATAKA

HC-KAR

2(a)

SMT. SUJATHAMMA

W/O LATE T.V.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

2(b)

SRI. HARISH

S/O LATE T.V.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT

JUNJANAHALLI VILLAGE

MURUGAMALLA HOBLI

CHINTAMANI TALUK

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-563 125.

2(c)

SMT. MAMATHA

D/O LATE T.V.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

W/O NARAYANA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS

R/AT NO.263/1,

OLD POLICE STATION, 3RD CROSS

BEHIND VASAVI MAHAL, K.R.PURAM

BENGALURU-560 036.

(AMENDED VIDE ORDER DATED 06.02.2026)

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. D.N.ARUN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2(a to c); VIDE ORDER DATED 16.07.2026, R1 IS DELETED)

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.07.2012

PASSED IN R.A.NO.20/2005 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL

JUDGE AND JMFC, CHINTAMANI, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND

SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED

31.01.2005 PASSED IN O.S.NO.71/2000 ON THE FILE OF

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.), AND JMFC, CHINTAMANI.

HC-KAR

IN RSA NO.1781/2012:

BETWEEN:

1.

SRI. T. VENKATARAVANAPPA

S/O LATE CHIKKA VENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS

2.

SRI. J.V. RAMESH

S/O LATE CHIKKA VENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 54 YERAS

BOTH ARE

R/AT JUNJANAHALLI VILLAGE

MURAGAMALLA HOBLI

CHINTAMANI TALUK

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-563 125.

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. V. VISWANATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

SRI. T.V. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS

2(a)

SMT. SUJATHAMMA

W/O LATE T.V.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

2(b)

SRI. HARISH

S/O LATE T.V.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT

JUNJANAHALLI VILLAGE

IRGAMPALLI POST

CHINTAMANI TALUK

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-563 125.

HC-KAR

2(c)

SMT. MAMATHA

D/O LATE T.V.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

W/O NARAYANA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS

R/AT NO.263/1,

OLD POLICE STATION, 3RD CROSS

BEHIND VASAVI MAHAL, K.R.PURAM

BENGALURU-560 036.

(AMENDED VIDE ORDER DATED 06.02.2026)

2.

SRI. C. NARAYANAPPA

S/O LATE CHIKKA VENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 60 YERAS

R/AT JUNJANAHALLI VILLAGE

MURAGAMALLA HOBLI

CHINTAMANI TALUK.

(VIDE ORDER DATED 16.07.2026, R2 IS DELETED,)

...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. D.N.ARUN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1(a to c); VIDE ORDER DATED 16.07.2026, R2 IS DELETED)

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.07.2012

PASSED IN R.A.NO.62/2006 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL

JUDGE AND JMFC, CHINTAMANI, ALLOWING THE APPEAL

AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED

14.07.2006 PASSED IN O.S.NO.88/2001 ON THE FILE OF

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.), AND JMFC, AND C/c OF

ADDITIONAL

CIVIL

JUDGE

(JR.DN.)

AND

JMFC,

CHINTAMANI.

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

HC-KAR

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

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

ORAL JUDGMENT

The appellant and the legal representatives of respondent No.2 have filed the compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC. In the compromise petition, it is stated that at the intervention of the well wishers and relatives, the parties have settled the matter.

2. In the compromise petition, the properties which were allotted in favour of the appellant and legal representatives of respondent No.2 are stated in detail and in terms of the compromise, prays the Court to decree the suit of the appellant by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Chintamani in R.A.No.20/2005 dated 25.07.2012 and confirm the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.71/2000 dated 31.01.2005 passed by the Junior Civil Judge and JMFC at Chintamani.

3. The parties have understood the terms of the compromise and the legal representatives of respondents, who

HC-KAR

are present before the Court also say that prayer sought in the compromise may be recorded.

4. The appellant and legal representatives of respondent No.1 have also filed a compromise petition in connected appeal in R.S.A.No.1781/2012. In the compromise petition, the properties which were allotted in favour of the appellant and legal representatives of respondent No.1 are stated in detail and in terms of the compromise, prays the Court to decree the suit of the appellant by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Chintamani in R.A.No.62/2006 dated 25.07.2012 and confirm the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.88/2001 dated 14.07.2006 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC at Chintamani and parties are one and the same and terms of the compromise are understood by the parties.

5. Hence, the compromise petitions are accepted.

6. Accordingly, the regular second appeals are disposed of in terms of the compromise.

HC-KAR

The Registry is directed to draw the decree in terms of the compromise Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead