Fraud Decree: Fraud Judges having failed to get illegal order (the way Society desired) from Mr. Pradeep. D.Waingankar, got this case transferred to Judge Mr.A.T. Munolli ; who happens to be member beneficiary of Fraud Judges Society & consented for a Fradulent Decree; which Decree is pasted below after our comments.The Order of Decree dated 10th March 2000 legalizing Land Grabbing by Judges & so also Fraudulant High Court Approved Loan got legalized ; which Mr. Waingankar as a Judge did not do ! [016.01][015.01][040.16][040.02] [016.02] [016.03]. This way Society got 37 acres of lands grabbed / compromise. Violation of all laws related to buying Agricultural Lands to formation-of-Sites under B.D.A. Crores of Rupees cheated to Govt.

{ Our Comments in [016.01] : This is The-Only Judgment & The-Judge ( Mr. Pradeep .D.Waingankar) we have come across who is above Board to be corrupted ; amongst all Judgments / Judges ( involved in Judicial Layout ).
High Lights of Judgment (interim order) dated 10th day of January. 1999 :
1) It is also evident from the loan application submitted to the High Court by the defendant that they have obtained loan for the construction for their house. All these documents produced by them will come to their help only when they are able to show that Sy. No. 98/2 or 98/7 belonging to the plaintiff have been acquired by the society.
2 ) Without acquiring the said Sy. No. the society gets no right to execute the sale-deed in respect of sites allotted to defendants 2 and 3 formed out of said Survey No. 98/7.
3 ) Where as the defendants 2 and 3 have failed to produce any documents much less a scrap of paper to show that they have got right, title interest or possession over the Sy. No. 98/7 from the Society had any kind of right over the same.

4 )Even in respect of the sites allotted to Defendants 2 and 3, no documents such as BDA plan or survey sketch have been produced to locate and identify the same. [Flash Movie ]
5 ) Keep a copy of this order in O. S. 7973/99. }


IN THE COURT OF THE CITY CIVIL JUDGE AT: BANGALORE
Original Suit No. 6003 of 1999.

Between:
The Karnataka State Judicial Department Employees'
House Building Co-operative Society Ltd., Plaintiff

And:
Sri. M. Muniyappa & another. Defendants.

ORDER SHEET

In the Court of XI Additional City Civil Judge , Bangalore
A.T.Munolli , Judge
Order dated March 10th 2000

Case called out.Defendents 2 to 7 and the President of the Ist Plantiff Society are present before the Court. Also their Advocates. M.S. for Plantiff filed Vakalath. Second Defendant present before the Court and submits he will not press I.A.No.3. Hence I.A.No.3 is dismissed as not pressed.

A Compromise Petition under Rule 3 of Order 23 Civil Procedure Code signed by the parties present before the court and their Advocates . Compromise Petition is filed .The contents of the Compromise Petition are admitted by the parties present before the Court. No impediment is brought to the Notice of the Court. Hence, the Compromise Petition is accepted.

Draw a Compromise Decree accordingly.
Refund Half Court Fee to the plantiff.

[ A.T.Munolli]

XI ADDL.C.C.J.,B'lore.

Plaintiff: The Karnataka State Judicial Department Employees House Building Co-operative Society Limited, High Court Building, Bangalore, by its Secretary / President.

Vs.

Defendants:

[1] N. Muniyappa S/o Junjappa
[2] Muniveeranna S/o Late Nanjappa.
[3] M. Narayanaswamy.
[4] M. Gopal .
[5] M. Rammurthy.
[6] M. Nagaraj.
[7] M. Venkatesh.
                                                                                                                                  Top
Under RULE 3 of ORDER 23, Read with SECTION 151 CPC.

The plaintiff and defendants beg to file the following compromise petition and pray as under:-

[1] The Plaintiff-Society filed the above suit for specific performance and declaration of agreement of sale and consequential injunction and for cancellation of Sale Deed dated: 07-3-1999 etc., and for other reliefs in respect of land bearing Survey No. 98/7 measuring 1-7 guntas situated at Allalasandra Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore District, on the basis of agreement of sale executed by the 1st Defendant in favour of the plaintiff society on 22-12-1984 by receiving the advance amount of Rs. 4, 000/- pursuant to the said agreement of sale, delivered possession to the plaintiff, it is also agreed that the plaintiff could get the lands acquired through proceedings under Land Acquisition Act for the purpose of forming Layout.

[2] In Pursuance of the said agreement of sale of the schedule land and plaintiff being put in possession of the same, formed layout in the schedule land along with other lands which were acquired by means of acquisition proceedings under the L. A. Act. The Plaintiff developed the entire land making roads, underground, sewerage water supply and electricity and formed sites giving site numbers of all the lands including acquired lands by the plaintiff society. The identity of the schedule land at present cannot be traced and but only sites with numbers could be traced. The Khata of the sites have been mad with the Yelahanka Municipality and assessed for tax. The plaintiff society has allotted sites to its members and executed sale deeds in their favor including the sites formed in the schedule land.

[3] The 1st defendant has now claimed that the schedule property belongs to the 2nd defendant by means of a Deed of Rectification made in between them on 17-03-1999 and registered as No. 832/99-2000 in respect of this land Survey No. 98/7 and claimed on the said basis has not belonging to him but it belongs to the 2nd defendant and his sons dependants 3 to 7 and filed a Written Statement stating that he is not the owner of the schedule property and it is the 2nd defendant and his son's are it is claimed by 2nd dependant i.e. the owner and it is claimed by 2nd dependant that there was a mistake in the original sale deed under which he purchased the schedule land and though the boundaries are correct the Survey No. was mistake, which is rectified by a Registered Rectification Deed executed by the 1st Defendant in favor of the 2nd dependant is the owner of the schedule land.

[4] The plaintiff and the defendants submit that on account of the dispute between the plaintiff society and the same land owners including the defendants who try to dispute about the plaintiffs ownership, the plaintiff society formed a four member committee to negotiate with former owners of the lands which were not acquired by the land acquisition proceedings, but by virtue of agreement of purchase have taken possession and formed layout to resolve the said disputes which comes within pocket lands in the middle of the acquired lands have negotiated with the said owners including defendants and arrived at a compromise with the intervention of the well wishes of plaintiff and defendants and accordingly the dispute is amicably settled in the interest of plaintiff-society and the defendants by arriving at the compromise.

[5] The 1st defendant has already filed a Written Statement, stating that he is not the owner and it is the 2nd defendant and his sons Defendants 3 to 7 who are the owners and that he has no interest whatsoever in the schedule land and in view of the same, the 2nd defendant and defendants 3 to 7 are the only concerned persons of this land, who has agreed and came forward to compromise the matter and thus the compromise is arrived at between the plaintiff and the 2nd defendant and sons.

[6] In view of the compromise entered into between the plaintiff - society and the defendants, the 2nd defendant and his sons defendants 3 to 7 have agreed and accepted the plaintiff is the owner of the schedule land which is shown as A- schedule in this compromise petition in which the layout has been formed with sites by providing all amenities along with other acquired lands and the 2nd defendant hereby withdraws all the allegations made in the Written Statement filed in this suit by accepting the plaintiff as the owner in possession of the suit schedule property which is shown in this petition as A- schedule and sites formed in the said land as the owner of sites and entitle to deal with the sites in any manner.                                                                              Top

[7] Plaintiff has agreed that out of the sites formed in the layout including the schedule land, that Site No. 1861, 167`1, 1672 and Site No. 1409/A the area of the land measuring 125' X 175' as per the schedule mentioned below with site Nos. measurement and boundaries as mentioned below in the table being given and allotted in favour of the 2nd defendant and his sons defendants 3 to 7 shall be the owner in the possession of these sites in respect of which the plaintiff society has no right, title or interest hereafter.

Sl. No.

Site No.

Measurement

East

West

North

South

1.

1861

49' X 49'

1860

Road

Road

1818

2.

1671

40' X 40'

Road

1672

Road

1670

3.

1672

40' X 40'

1671

Road

Road

1673

4.

1409/A

125' X 175'

Road

Water Channel

Pltf's Property

Cross Road

These sites are shown, as B-Schedule in this compromise petition and the said sites are not allotted to any other person.

[8] The defendant 2 to 17 have agreed and accepted that the plaintiff is the owner of all the sites formed in Land Survey No. 98/7 measuring sl-7 guntas which is called J.D. EHBC Society Ltd., Layout, Allalasandra, Bangalore North Taluk shown as A-Schedule land, and has no objection to decree the suit of the plaintiff declaring the plaintiff as the owner in possession of the enter land and sites formed in the said land and every right to deal with them in any manner and defendants 2 to 7 have no manner of right, title or interest. The defendants 2 to 7 will not interfere with the plaintiffs possession of land and allotted sites by the plaintiff of allottee's peaceful possession and enjoyment of A-schedule Property of this compromise petition and sites formed therein.

[9] The plaintiff has agreed to executed sale deeds in favout of the 2nd defendant or his son's defendants 3 to 7 in respect of B-schedule sites and to get the registered before the Sub-Registrar at Yelahanka at the costs of the 2nd defendant or his sons defendants 3 to 7 of stamp duty, Registration fee and other charges. The plaintiff has also accepted that the defendants 2 to 7 shall be the owner of

B-Schedule sites given and allotted in favor of the defendants 2 to 7 and the plaintiff has no objection for the defendants 2 to 7 to get the Khata and other relevant documents, transformed in his favor from the competent authority. The plaintiff has no objection for the defendants 2 to 7 to use the roads formed in the layout and use of the other facilities provided and the defendants 2 to 7 have been recognized as an allottee and site holder in the layout and entitled for all the available facilities and the plaintiff will not interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the B-schedule sites allotted to the defendants

2 to 7.

[10] The plaintiff and the defendants 2 to 7 have agreed to withdraw all pending cases i.e. civil and criminal cases in respect of the above said land and sites, particularly suit filed by the 2nd defendant of O. S. No. 8116/99 in the City Civil Court, Bangalore and criminal case filed by the plaintiff. The plaintiff and the defendants 2 to 7 for a decree in terms of this compromise petition .

A-SCHEDULE

[11] All the piece and parcel of land bearing Survey No. 98/7 measuring 1.7 guntas and sites formed therein with roads and other amenities provided by the plaintiff society situated at allalsandra Village. Yelahanka Hobli Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore District bounded on.

East by : Survey No. 98/9

West by: Survey No. 92/2

North by: Survey No. 98/6

South by: Survey No. 98/8 B- SCHEDULE

Sl No. Site No. Measurement East West North South
1. 1861 49' X 49' 1860 Road Road 1818
2. 1671 40' X 40' Road 1672 Road 1670
3. 1672 40' X 40' 1671 Road Road 1673
4. 1409/A 125' X 175' Road Water

Channel

Pltf's

Property

Cross Road

Advocate for the Plaintiff. Plaintiff

Advocate for the 2nd defendant 2nd defendant

Defendants 3 to 7

Advocate for the Defendants 3 to 7

Place: Bangalore

Date: 10-03-2000.

Top

****************** Page No. 6 to 13 *************