Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2004 DIGILAW 1522 (SC)

H. RAMAYYA REDDY v. SUNKAMMA

2004-10-26

ASHOK BHAN, S.H.KAPADIA

body2004
ORDER 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the High Court of Karnataka dated 9-12-1999 passed in Regular Second Appeal No. 709 of 1995. 2. One Pilla Reddy was the owner of a large number of properties. He was married twice. From his first wife he had a son H. Ramayya Reddy, the appellant herein. A partition took place between Pilla Reddy and his son H.Ramayya Reddy in the year 1973. Pilla Reddy is alleged to have executed two wills bequeathing the remaining properties, which had come to his share in partition, in favour of the sons of H. Ramayya Reddy i.e. his grandsons. His widow, Smt Sunkamma filed a suit for partition against her stepson H. Ramayya Reddy. The beneficiaries under the wills were not made. parties to the suit. The trial court dismissed the suit. In appeal the judgment and decree passed by the trial court was affirmed. 3. Aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the courts below Sunkamma filed Regular Second Appeal No. 709 of 1995 in the High Court. The High Court accepted the second appeal and held that the wills executed by Pilla Reddy in favour of his grandsons were surrounded by suspicious circumstances and, therefore, the wills were not validly executed. Aggrieved by the same the present appeal has been filed by the appellant-defendant. 4. The parties have settled the dispute amicably by entering into a compromise. The terms of settlement have been set out in a deed of c compromise dated 21-10-2004. The original compromise deed produced in the Court is taken on record. Shri H. Ramayya Reddy, the appellant herein, and Smt Sunkamma (the first respondent herein) have filed their affidavits in support of the compromise arrived at. The daughters of Smt Sunkamma who were co-defendants with the appellant, have also filed their affidavits accepting the settlement arrived at between H. Ramayya Reddy and Smt Sunkamma. Similarly, the sons of H. Ramayya Reddy, the beneficiaries under the will, have also signed the compromise as consenting witnesses. 5. The terms of the compromise are as follows: "(2) The appellant and his three sons viz. Similarly, the sons of H. Ramayya Reddy, the beneficiaries under the will, have also signed the compromise as consenting witnesses. 5. The terms of the compromise are as follows: "(2) The appellant and his three sons viz. Shri R. Ravindra Reddy @ Thimma Reddy, Shri H.R. Keshava Reddy and Shri H.R. Ramesh Reddy, who have signed this compromise petition as witnesses have allotted the I properties set out in the schedule hereunder and money (cash, cheque or DO) as set out in the succeeding paragraph, towards the claim of the respondents in respect of the joint family properties specified in the schedule to the suit as No. 75 of 1986 on the file of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Bangalore and the respondents agree to receive the same in full and final settlement of their claims in respect of all the joint I family properties specified in the said suit. (3) The appellant shall pay to the respondents a sum of Rs.5,00,000 within one month and another sum of Rs. 5,00,000 within three months from today. (4) The respondents hereby agree that they shall not, except in respect of the properties set out in the schedule hereunder, lay any claim in respect of other properties set out in the schedule to the suit as No. 75 of 1986 or properties which have fallen to the share of Shri Ramaiah Reddy under the partition deed dated 15-6-1972 entered into between Mr H. Pilla Reddy and Mr H. Ramayya Reddy. (5) The appellant and his sons hereby reiterate that the schedule , properties are free from all encumbrances of whatsoever nature and that no one else other than the parties hereto, has any right, title or interest in the said properties. The appellant and his sons reiterate that they have been in actual and exclusive possession and have been personally cultivating Item 2 of the schedule properties. (6) The appellant and his sons, if so required by the respondents, agree to execute a registered partition deed allotting the schedule properties in favour of the respondents herein as their share, within one month from today. (7) The first respondent has filed a suit as No. 297 of 1998 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge, Junior Division, Bangalore, against the appellant in respect of Item 1 of the schedule properties. (7) The first respondent has filed a suit as No. 297 of 1998 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge, Junior Division, Bangalore, against the appellant in respect of Item 1 of the schedule properties. In view of the fact that the said property has been allotted to her towards her and her daughters' share as per this compromise petition, she agrees to withdraw the said suit. (8) The appellant and his sons agree to execute such other deeds and documents as may be necessary to effectively transfer the schedule properties in favour of the respondents." 6. The schedule of properties which is a part of the compromise is also reproduced hereinbelow: "(i) All that part and parcel of the residential property bearing Khasra Nos. 290, 291, 292, 293 and new Khasra Nos. 109, 105 and 117 (309-A, 309-B and 310) and situated at Varthur, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk, measuring approximately east to west 104 ft and north to south 48 ft on the side of property of H.A. Narayana Reddy consisting of old structures and land and bounded in the east by Namale Ramaiah property, west by Varthur Main Road, north by properties belonging to H.A. Narayana Reddy and property of Mr Ravindra at the extreme end and south by property belonging to Muniraj and others. (ii) All that part and parcel of the agricultural land bearing Survey No. 54/5 situated at Kattariguppe Village, Sarjapur Hobli, Anekal Taluk, measuring 3 acres and 3 guntas and assessed at Rs.5.00 and bounded in the east by property belonging to T. Ramaiah, west by properties belonging to Nanjamma and Gowramma, north by Halasahalli Village boundary and south by property belonging to T. Ramaiah." 7. In view of the compromise arrived at, the judgment and decree passed by the High Court is modified in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The suit is decreed in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties. This compromise would bind the appellant herein, Sunkamma and her two daughters who were co-defendants with the appellant and have filed their affidavits accepting the settlement arrived at between H. Ramayya Reddy and Sunkamma. Similarly, the sons of H. Ramayy a Reddy the beneficiaries under the will who have signed the compromise as consenting witnesses would also be bound by the terms of the settlement. 8. Similarly, the sons of H. Ramayy a Reddy the beneficiaries under the will who have signed the compromise as consenting witnesses would also be bound by the terms of the settlement. 8. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs.