Brij Lal (Died) Through Lrs. Smt. ... vs Chandra Lal (Died) Through Lrs. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6215 Chatt

                                   1

                                                                     NAFR
           HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                           FA No. 191 of 2006

    Brij Lal (Since Dead) Through LRs.

     1(a). Smt. Kamal Devi Wd/o Late Brijlal, R/o Gulmohar Colony,
           Beladula Road, Raigarh Chhattisgarh.
     1(b). Rajkumar Talreja S/o Late Brijlal, R/o Gulmohar Colony,
           Beladula Road, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
     1(c). Smt. Godavari Talreja D/o Late Brijlal, W/o Shri Dunichand
           Ahuja, R/o Sector - 5, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh
                                                           ---- Appellants

                                Versus

    Chandra Lal (Since Dead) Through LRs.

     1.    Smt. Bhagwati Devi W/o Late Chandralal, R/o Parumal
           Bhawan, Sindhi Colony, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
     2.    Amer Lal Talreja S/o Late Chandralal, R/o Parumal
           Bhawan, Sindhi Colony, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
     3.     Satruhan Talreja S/o Late Chandralal, R/o Parumal
           Bhawan, Sindhi Colony, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
     4.    Smt. Rajni Talreja D/o Late Chandralal, R/o Parumal
           Bhawan, Sindhi Colony, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
     5.    Smt. Gangadevi D/o Late Chandralal, R/o Parumal
           Bhawan, Sindhi Colony, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
     6.    Smt. Jamunadevi D/o Late Chandralal, R/o Parumal
           Bhawan, Sindhi Colony, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

                                                        ---- Respondents

For Appellants : Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Sr. Advocate, along with Mr. Ramayan Yadav, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra under instruction of Mr. K. N. Nande, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Judgment On Board

12.10.2022

1. On the previous date of hearing learned counsel appearing on either

side had submitted that since the appellants and the respondents are

near relatives, they have decided to settle the matter out of Court and

the compromise agreement entered into between the parties would

be brought on record.

2. In terms of the submission made by the counsel for the parties, the

appellants and the respondents were directed to remain present

before this Court to ascertain the settlement part.

3. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the appellants as also

the respondents are present in person before this Court. They have

duly confirmed the agreement/compromise that was entered into

between the parties on 26.09.0222.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants as also counsel for the

respondents make a categorical statement that in terms of the

compromise that has been arrived at between the parties on

26.09.2022, the present appeal itself can be disposed of.

5. Perusal of the compromise/agreement it reveals that the parties have

decided to divide the suit property i.e. a two storey house measuring

1812 square feet equally between the two contesting parities. The

property has been vertically divided between the two parties and it

has been decided that each of the parties would have 906 square feet

of share. Therefore, now the parties do not intend to pursue the

litigation any further and want the appeal to be disposed of in terms of

the compromise arrived at on 26.09.2022.

6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the present appeal

stands disposed of in terms of the compromise deed entered into

between the parties on 26.09.2022. The Registry is directed to draw

a decree in terms of the compromise deed entered into between the

parties. The compromise deed would be made part of the judgment

and decree.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Khatai