Lohiya Mallaha vs Prahalad Kumar Tamrakar & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1105 MP

                                   1
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                  FA No. 193 of 2004
                (LOHIYA MALLAHA Vs PRAHALAD KUMAR TAMRAKAR & ORS)

Jabalpur, Dated : 24-01-2022
      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      Shri D.N. Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant.
      None for the respondents.

Heard on I.A. No.6838/2021 which is an application under Order 23 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure for passing a decree in accordance with the compromise arrived at by the parties.

In compliance of order of this Court dated 16.11.2021, verification statement of the parties have been recorded before the Registrar (J-1) on 07.12.2021. The Registrar (J-1) in his report stated that in the light of factual position, it is clear that both the parties have entered into the agreement voluntarily without any undue influence or pressure. They are mentally sound, major and competent to enter into the compromise. After accepting the application for compromise, their compromise matter be legally disposed of according to terms and conditions of written compromise of the parties.

Thus, the application is allowed. Decree be passed on the basis of

terms and conditions mentioned in the compromise application, which are to the following effect :-

1. The sale deed dated 01.02.1996 registered on 19.03.1996 bearing No.1791 executed by respondent No.5/defendant No.5 in favour of respondent No.1 to 4/defendant No.1 to 4 on the basis of fraudulent Power of Attorney dated 05.06.1995, on behalf of appellant/plaintiff, in respect of suit land bearing Aaraji No.1394/2 admeasuring 0.79 acres and 1395/2 admeasuring 1.79 acres total 2.58 acres situated in Kripalpur, Tahsil Raghurajnagar, District Satna (M.P.), be declared as null and void.

2. The judgment and decree dated 27.02.2004 passed by V Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Satna (M.P.) in Civil

Suit No.33-A/2004 (Loliya Mallah vs. Prahlad Kumar Tamrakar & others) be declared as null and void.

3. The sale deed dated 21.10.2002 registered on 13.12.2002 bearing No.1241 was executed by appellant/plaintiff, in respect of land bearing Aaraji No.1394/2 admeasuring 0.79 acres out of which

0.34 acre was sold and 1395/2 admeasuring 1.79 acres out of which 1.75 acres was sold, total area sold is 2.09 acres in favour of Smt. Vineeta Singh w/o Shri Deovrat Singh, R/o Mukhtiyarganj, Tehsil Raghurajnagar, District Satna (M.P.) and the possession of the said land was handed over by appellant/plaintiff to Smt. Vineeta Singh at the time of execution of sale deed itself. The aforesaid sale deed dated 21.10.2002 be declared as valid and effective and binding to all the parties and aforesaid Smt. Vineeta Singh be declared as owner of the said land, and the remaining land total admeasuring 0.49 acres will belong to the appellant/plaintiff. The possession as recorded in demarcation order dated 17.02.2009 passed in Demarcation case No.38A 12/2008-09 in favour of Smt. Vineeta Singh is acknowledged by the appellant/plaintiff and the possession as recorded therein be binding on all the parties and their legal heirs. The appellant/plaintiff shall also be paid Rs.50,000/- before this Hon'ble Court, in lieu of the expenses incurred in litigation.

The above compromise application will be part of the decree. Parties shall bear their own cost.

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. A decree be drawn accordingly.

(SMT. ANJULI PALO) JUDGE

rj Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by RAJESH KUMAR JYOTISHI Date: 2022.01.25 19:07:36 IST