AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anand Byrareddy
The first respondent, who was the plaintiff before the trial court and the appellants have preferred a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 before this Court, which reads as follows:-
The Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 are non-parties to the suit and the 3rd applicant is the plaintiff before the court below.
The Applicant''s have agreed between themselves to have the suit settled on terms mutually agreed upon as follows.
That the 1st Respondent / Plaintiff has agreed to accept compensation of a sum of Rs. 17,00,000/- in lieu of specific performance of the contract and the Applicant No. 1 and 2 / Appellants, who are bonafide purchasers for value without notice have today paid a sum of Rs. 17,00,000/- the 1st respondent / plaintiff in cash.
In terms of the afore mentioned payment schedule, the judgment and decree passed by the V Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore in O.S.No. 3760/2001 dated 10.6.2009 may be modified decreeing the suit by directing that the 1st respondent / plaintiff is entitled to receive compensation of a sum of Rs. 17,00,000/- in lieu of specific performance of the contract and affirming that the appellants are bonafide purchasers for value without notice and entitled to continue in possession of the property bearing No. 14/1, 4th Main, Lakshminarayanapura, Bangalore- 21, measuring East to West 25 Ft. and North to South (24+30) 2 Ft. with Ground and First Floor RCC roofed building and bounded on the
East by : Drainage
West by : Private Property
North by : Muniveerappa''s property
South by : Drainage
That the liberty may be reserved to the Plaintiff / 1st respondent to revive the appeal or to seek appropriate orders from this Hon''ble Court in the event of failure to adhere to the payment terms by the appellants.
Refund of Court Fee paid on the memorandum of appeal may be directed in terms of Section 66(c) of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act. 1958.
The appellants have no objection for refund of the balance sale consideration deposited by the 1st respondent before the V Additional City Civil Judge, in Ex. Case No. 1591/2009 in favour of the 1st respondent.
Appellants 1 and 2 (applicants 1 and 2) and respondent no. 1 (applicant no. 3) are present before the court and would state that they have agreed on the terms of the compromise petition. This court is satisfied as to the bona fides of the parties and that the compromise petition is valid in law.
Accordingly, the compromise petition is allowed and the decree is modified to the effect that the plaintiff -respondent no. 1 in the present appeal receives Rs. 17,00,000/-(Rupees Seventeen Lakh only) in full and final satisfaction in lieu of specific performance of contract and relinquishes his right in respect of the property.
The office is directed to draw-up a decree in terms of the above compromise petition.
The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. The office is directed to refund the entire court fees in favour of appellant no. 1.