Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 235 (KAR)

Gowramma W/o Muniyappa v. Muniyamma Dead by her LRs.

2017-02-02

K.S.MUDAGAL

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. Appellant Nos. 1 (2a to 2d), 3 and their respective counsel present. The parties are duly identified by their counsel. The Parties file fresh compromise petition. The parties admit the due execution of the compromise petition. Both submit that in view of the revised compromise petition, the compromise petition filed on 1.2.2017 may be disposed as not pressed. Therefore, the same is disposed of accordingly. 2. Respondents 4 and 5 in both these appeals are the purchasers of 2 sites in plaint schedule item no. 1. Both submit that the claim of the parties against defendants 4 and 5 (respondent nos. 4 and 5) is not pressed. Consequently, the appeal and suit against them is dismissed. 3. Heard on the compromise petition. Satisfied that the compromise is admissible in law. Therefore, the compromise is recorded. The appeals are allowed accordingly. The impugned judgment and decree are hereby set-aside. The suit is decreed in terms of the compromise petition. Draw final decree accordingly on furnishing the required stamp duty.