Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 172 (KAR)

G. v. Satish VS K. R. Vadiraja

2013-02-12

B.SREENIVASE GOWDA, D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR

body2013
JUDGMENT D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.—This appeal is by the defendant in O.S. No. 3139 of 2008 on the file of the XX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, for getting over the judgment and decree that the defendant had suffered where under the suit of the plaintiff had been decreed a money claim for the sum of Rupees 22 Lakhs with interest etc. After issue of notice, respondent is served and represented by Counsel. 2. Further, during the pendency of the appeal, parties had taken time to report settlement in the matter between them and a compromise petition has placed before the Court under the provisions of Order 23, Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The terms of the settlement reads as under: COMPROMISE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 23, RULE 3 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 The parties above name submits as follows.-- 1. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant, respondent, respondent's wife Smt. K.V. Mamatha and their well wishers have had detailed negotiations with regard to the proceedings pending before this Hon'ble Court and also with regard to the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 8417 of 2008 on the file of Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City, filed by the appellant herein against Smt. K.V. Mamatha and respondent and finally the appellant herein paid a sum of Rs. 33,25,000/- (Rupees Thirty-three Lakhs Twenty-five Thousand only) in full and final settlement of all the claims of the respondent which arises in the appeal. The respondent has agreed and accepted the said sum of Rs. 33,25,000/- (Rupees Thirty-three Lakhs Twenty-five Thousand only) by way of Banker Cheque bearing No. 038259, dated 5-10-2012, drawn on State Bank of Mysore, Chamarajpet Branch, Bangalore in favour of the respondent in full and final settlement of all his claims arising out of the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 3139 of 2008 on the file of XX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City (CCH No. 32) and which is the subject-matter of this appeal and the appellant paid a sum of Rs. 4,25,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Twenty-five Thousand only) vide Bankers cheque bearing No. 037998, dated 21-9-2012, drawn on State Bank of Mysore, Chamarajapet Branch, Bangalore, which was claimed by respondents wife in O.S. No. 8417 of 2008 on the file of Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City, in full and final settlement of his claims. Accordingly, the respondent and his wife have settled all the disputes with the appellant each one of them have no claims what so ever against each other. 2. Respondent and his wife have delivered and handed over vacant possession of premises bearing No. 238, situated at Chamarajapet, 4th Main Road, Bangalore 560 018, measuring in all 133,42 sq. m. which was in their occupation and which was the subject-matter of O.S. No. 8417 of 2008 on the file of the Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City. 3. In view of the above the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 3139 of 2008 on the file of XX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City, (CCH No. 32) which is impugned herein is fully satisfied. The appeal is liable to be disposed of accordingly as the respondent has received the aforesaid amount towards full and final settlement of all his claims arising out of judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 3139 of 2008. In token of the same the respondent and his wife have sworn to an affidavit which is annexed herewith. 4. In view of the aforesaid terms and conditions agreed between the parties, the appellant prays for refund of the full Court fee paid and the same may be ordered to be paid to the appellant. 5. Wherefore it is prayed that the appeal may be disposed of in terms of this compromise petition. 3. The respondent-decree-holder in the suit has also placed an affidavit indicating certain payments and cheques received in terms of the compromise petition. 4. Compromise petition also indicates that certain money transactions between the appellant and respondent's wife for a sum of Rs. 4,25,000/- has also been made subject-matter of the compromise between the parties and the compromise petition makes reference to this also. 5. 4. Compromise petition also indicates that certain money transactions between the appellant and respondent's wife for a sum of Rs. 4,25,000/- has also been made subject-matter of the compromise between the parties and the compromise petition makes reference to this also. 5. In view of the matter having been compromised between the parties and the parties being present before the Court today, we have enquired them and they have indicated that the compromise is to their satisfaction and voluntarily accept the same. Therefore, this appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise petition placed before the Court. The judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court is set aside and in its place the suit is decreed as per the terms of the compromise petition. 6. Registry is directed to draw up the decree accordingly. 7. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the matter having been compromised even before hearing the matter, the appellant is entitled for refund of Court fee. We direct the registry to refund the Court fee paid on the memorandum of appeal as per the provisions of Karnataka Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958.