SECOND APPEAL 1 of 2021 on 18 September 2002

COMMON ORDER:-

The appellant, respondents 2, 4, 6 and 7 in S.A.No.3 of 2003 are personally present and are identified by Sri S.Subba Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri B.Nageswara Rao, learned counsel for the respondents. The absence of Sri K.Chakravarthi, who is arrayed as 5[th] respondent, is explained by stating that the said 5[th] respondent has taken sanyas and he is not associated with the family any more. The absence of 8[th]respondent is sought to be waived by stating that the 8[th]respondent was only a mortgagee of the property at the time of the filing of the suit and the said mortgage is cleared.

2. The appellant in A.S.No.806 of 2002 as well as respondents 1, 3, 4 and 5 are present and are identified by their respective counsels.

3. The application in the present case commenced with O.S.No.69 of 1988 being filed on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tadepalligudem by the plaintiff, who is the appellant herein, for specific performance of an agreement of sale for an extent of Ac.1.57 cents of land in R.S.No.64/3 of Kakarlamudi Village, Ungutur Mandal, West Godavari District, dated 24.04.1981, executed by Smt. M.Vijaya Lakshmi in favour of the father of the plaintiff. This suit was dismissed by the decree and judgment, dated 18.09.2002 against which A.S.No.109 of 1997 was filed on the file of the Principle District Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District and the same was also dismissed by the decree and judgment, dated 18.09.2002. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff has filed S.A.No.3 of 2003 before this Court and the same is pending. In a parallel proceedings, the 2[nd] respondent in the second appeal had filed O.P.No.42 of 1995, which was renumbered as O.S.No.58 of 1996, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Tadepalligudem, for recovery of possession of schedule properties and partition of the same against the 1[st] respondent herein and the plaintiff/appellant. This suit was decreed by judgment, dated 21.01.2002. A.S.No.806 of 2002 has been filed before this Court against this judgment and decree and is pending.

4. The parties in these two proceedings, which are pending before this Court, have arrived at a compromise which has been reduced into writing and is signed by the parties to the said compromise. In this compromise, the defendants/respondents have agreed to alienate the said Ac.1.57 cents of land in favour of the appellant/plaintiff on payment of Rs.22 lakhs to respondents 2, 4, 6 and 7 and Smt. Bhargavi Devi, who is 3[rd] respondent, in A.S.No.806 of 2002.

5. The appellant has paid Rs.7,50,000/- by way of demand draft bearing No.302929 drawn in favour of Smt.S.Subba Lakshmi and the same has been handed over to the respondents and the respondents acknowledged receipt of the said demand draft.

6. The terms of the compromise further state that the appellant shall pay the remaining sale consideration of Rs.14,50,000/- within two (2) months on the date of the registration of the sale deed, which shall bind the respondents 2, 4, 6 and 7 and Smt.Bhargavi Devi to execute a regular sale deed in favour of the appellant. The other terms set out in the compromise are not being stated in this order but shall continue to bind the parties to the compromise.

7. The parties have acknowledged that they are aware of the terms of the compromise and accepted the said terms of the compromise. Hence, compromise recorded. Accordingly, I.A.No.1 of 2021 in A.S.No.806 of 2002 and I.A.No.1 of 2021 in S.A.No.3 of 2003 are allowed.

8. In that view of the matter, the A.S.No.806 of 2002 and S.A.No.3 of 2003 are disposed of in terms of the compromise, dated 19.11.2021. No costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

Date: 19.11.2021

_________________________

JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

SPP

SPP

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

I.A.No.1 of 2021 in/and APPEAL SUIT No.806 of 2002andI.A.No.1 of 2021 in/and SECOND APPEAL No.3 of 2003

Date: 19.11.2021