CIVIL APPEAL 194 of 2008 on 5 August 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No. No.194 of 2008 With

I.A. No.842 of 2016

Balbir Dutt,

S/o Late Shiv Das Dutt, R/o Hehal Town, Ranchi, P.S. - Sukhdeonagar, District - Ranchi…...Appellant

Versus

1(b) Roshan Lal, R/o Gayababu Lane, P.O. + P.S. - Sukhdeonagar, District – RanchiSukhdeonagar, District – Ranchi 1(c) Major Ritesh Kumar, S/o late Ramesh Chandra Lal, R/o Flat No.305 Hari Ram Apartment Holiday Homes, Kanke Road, P.O. - CMPDI, P.S. - Gonda (J), District – Ranchi At present R/o GSO – 1 (OPS) Head Quarters – 21 Corps C/o – 56 APO, PIN – 908521R/o Flat No.305 Hari Ram Apartment Holiday Homes, Kanke Road, P.O. - CMPDI, P.S. - Gonda (J), District – Ranchi At present R/o GSO – 1 (OPS) Head Quarters – 21 Corps C/o – 56 APO, PIN – 908521

1(d) Lina Gupta, W/o Raj Kumar Gupta, D/o Ramesh Chandra Lal, R/o Flat No.305 Hari Ram Apartment Holiday Homes, Kanke Road, P.O. - CMPDI, P.S. - Gonda (J), District – Ranchi, At present R/o Science House, Near Ghanta Ghar, Birganj Nepal.Chandra Lal, R/o Flat No.305 Hari Ram Apartment Holiday Homes, Kanke Road, P.O. - CMPDI, P.S. - Gonda (J), District – Ranchi, At present R/o Science House, Near Ghanta Ghar, Birganj Nepal.

…... Respondents

---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA

---------

For the Appellant: Mr. Ram Kishore Prasad, Advocate Mr. Ranjan Kumar, AdvocateFor the Respondents : Mr. Satish Kr. Keshri, Advocate : Mr. Ram Kishore Prasad, Advocate Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate

---------

13/Dated: 11th August, 2016

The present application has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 05.08.2008 and 14.08.2008 respectively. Passed by Subordinate Judge – IV, Ranchi in Title Suit No.133 of 2003 whereby the suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff with direction for execution of the sale deed in terms of the agreement dated 12.06.2000 in favour of the plaintiff within two months.

2. Learned counsel, for the appellant, has submitted that during the pendency of the appeal, both the parties have entered into a compromise and compromise petition has been filed by way of I.A. No.842 of 2016 and the parties have agreed that they shall share the proceeds of the sale in the ratio of 3:7.

3. Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondents, has submitted that supplementary affidavit has been filed annexing the letters of authority of respondent Nos.1(c) and 1(d) wherein they have admitted that they have executed General Power of Attorney in favour of respondent No.1(b), Roshan Lal to compromise the case on the terms and conditions as enumerated in the compromise petition and deed of agreement between the parties and the description of the land as delineated in Annexure – 1 of the said interlocutory application.

In course of argument, learned counsel, for the respondents, has filed the letters in original along with envelopes, which have been received from respondent Nos.1(c) and 1(d). The same is made part of the record.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this appeal is decreed in terms of the compromise and agreement entered between the parties as annexed in I.A. No.842 of 2016.

Office is directed to prepare a decree accordingly, and the compromise (along with annexures of I.A. No.842 of 2016) shall form part of the decree.

5. This appeal stands allowed in terms of the compromise/ agreement as mentioned above.

(AMITAV K. GUPTA, J.)