B.R. VEERABASAVARADHYA versus THE DEVOTEES OF LINGADGUDI MUTT AND ORS.

B.R. VEERABASAVARADHYA versus THE DEVOTEES OF LINGADGUDI MUTT AND ORS.

The appellant, having compromised in terms of the compromise memo recorded against him, is bound by the compromise decree and cannot have any grievance with subsequent compromise decrees recorded as against other defendants. The litigation as regards the appellant had come to an end, and he is bound by his compromise.

Parties
Appellant: B.R. Veerabasa; A.V. Aradhya; Respondents: The Devotees of Lingadgudi Mutt and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 May 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Compromise Decree, Order 23 Rule 3 CPC
Civil Procedure Compromise Decree Order 23 Rule 3 CPC

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B.R. Veerabasa

Appellant

A.V. Aradhya

The Devotees of Lingadgudi Mutt and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant-defendant 1 can challenge compromise decree passed as against defendants 2 to 4 after having compromised as against himself under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant, having compromised in terms of the compromise memo recorded against him, is bound by the compromise decree and cannot have any grievance with subsequent compromise decrees recorded as against other defendants. The litigation as regards the appellant had come to an end, and he is bound by his compromise.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.