Karnataka High Court
Civil Procedure and EvidenceProperty and Real Estate Law

Parties’ Compromise in Second Appeal Is Recorded as a Decree Executable According to Its Terms.

THE PRESIDENT AND ANR vs VIJAYKUMAR

Karnataka High CourtJUDGMENT: September 23, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Parties’ Compromise in Second Appeal Is Recorded as a Decree Executable According to Its Terms.. THE PRESIDENT AND ANR vs VIJAYKUMAR. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The respondent had sued for possession of four acres in Survey No. 47/1A at Sirnoor, alleging entitlement to the property.

Source reference: p. 3

The trial court dismissed the suit; the first appellate court partly allowed the respondent’s appeal and decreed recovery of three acres, prompting the defendants’ second appeal.

Source reference: pp. 5–6

During the second appeal, the parties entered into a mediated compromise. The appellants agreed to pay the respondent ₹1.70 crore in instalments in full and final settlement of his claims concerning the land.

Source reference: pp. 6–9

The parties were present before the High Court; the Court accepted the daughter’s special power of attorney in favour of her brother, and the appellants handed over a demand draft for ₹25 lakh, which the respondent acknowledged receiving.

Source reference: pp. 3–4, 9
02

Issues

1. Whether the parties’ compromise could be accepted and the second appeal disposed of in its terms.

Source reference: pp. 4–5, 9

2. Whether the decree should provide for recovery of the agreed settlement amount in the event of non-compliance with the payment schedule.

Source reference: p. 7
03

Law Applied

Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, provides for recording a lawful compromise in writing and signed by the parties, and for passing a decree in accordance with it.

Source reference: no citation

The appeal was brought under Section 100 read with Order XLII Rule 1 CPC.

Source reference: p. 2

The Court cited no precedents and did not independently decide the underlying title or limitation questions; those matters were addressed through the parties’ agreed terms.

Source reference: pp. 7–8
04

Reasoning

The Court found it just and reasonable to dispose of the appeal in accordance with the parties’ compromise, noting their presence and the respondent’s receipt of the first instalment of ₹25 lakh.

Source reference: pp. 3–5, 9

The compromise specified the remaining instalments and provided that the respondent could execute the decree to recover the agreed amounts in the event of default.

Source reference: pp. 6–7

The Court accepted the settlement and directed the Registry to draw the decree accordingly.

Source reference: p. 10
05

Holding

The High Court disposed of the second appeal on the terms of the compromise petition and directed the Registry to draw the decree in those terms.

The compromise provides for payment of ₹1.70 crore in instalments, with execution available to recover amounts in the event of non-compliance; the parties were to bear their own costs.

Source reference: pp. 6–9
06

Acts & Sections Cited

1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Code of Civil Procedure, 19081

Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

THE PRESIDENT AND ANRvsVIJAYKUMAR

Karnataka High Court · September 23, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment