Dr. Smt. Sunita vs Durga Prasad
2022 Latest Caselaw 579 MP

                                  - : 1 :-
                                                              F.A. No. 56/2016



HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE
     (SINGLE BENCH : HON. Mr. JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA)

                           F.A. No. 56 of 2016
Dr. Smt. Sunita W/o. Dr. Uday Yarday, Aged about 50 years, Occupation :
Doctor, R/o. Infront of Lokendra Talkies, Ratlam, District Ratlam.
                                                              ---Appellant.
                                   Versus
1.    Durga Prasad S/o. Gordhanlalji Dhakad, Aged about 35 years,
      Occupation : Agriculturist, R/o. Gram Ambodia, Tehsil &
      District Ratlam.
2.    State of M.P. Through Collector, Ratlam, District Ratlam.
                                                             ---Respondents.

Date: 12.01.2022 :

Shri Jagdish Baheti, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Rajeev Bhatjiwale, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

Heard on I.A. No.7568/2021, an application filed under Order 23 Rule 1 & 2 of C.P.C. During pendency of this appeal, the parties have entered into compromise.

By way of this appeal, appellant/defendant No.1 has challenged the decree of specific performance dated 4.11.2015 passed in Civil Suit No.6-A/2014 whereby the suit filed by plaintiff/respondent No.1 - Durgaprasad has been decreed.

In the present appeal, husband of the appellant - Dr. Uday Yarday has submitted an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of C.P.C. In the compromise application he has also signed in favour of the compromise. All the three appeared before the Principal Registrar for verification of the compromise. The Principal Registrar after verification has submitted the report dated 15.12.2021 that the parties have voluntarily without any coercion or fraud. The terms of the compromise are reproduced below :

"6- ;gfd] mDRk jkthukesa ds vkyksd esa fuEukuqlkj fu.kZ; ,oa t;i= ikfjr fd;s tkus dh d`ik djsa& v- ;gfd] mHk;i{kksa ds e/; gq, mDr jkthukesa ds vuqlkj vihykFkhZ dh vihy Lohdkj dj fopkj.k U;k;ky; izFke vfrfjDRk ftyk U;k;k/kh'k egksn;] jryke }kjk fnukad 04-11-2015 dks flfoy okn dzekad 06&,@2014 esa ikfjr fu.kZ; o t;i= vikLr djrs gq, izR;[email protected] nqxkZilkn }kjk fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k

- : 2 :-

F.A. No. 56/2016

izLrqr fd;k x;k lafonk fnukad 06-02-2009 ds fofufnZ"V ikyu ls lacaf/kr mDr okn fujLr fd;k tkosA vi- mHk;i{k bl vihy dk vkSj fopkj.k U;k;ky; esa izLrqr okn dk O;; viuk&viuk Lo;a ogu djsaxsaA"

In view of the aforesaid compromise, impugned judgment dated 4.11.2015 is hereby set aside and the suit filed by respondent No.1 is dismissed.

( VIVEK RUSIA ) JUDGE Alok/-

ALOK Digitally signed by ALOK GARGAV DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=eae18b7018e4245a54c74948bb27999d7e0525268640 65b20b27a5804a3e1fea,

GARGAV pseudonym=7CDEDE27CC58A5C0E24DE6046DC50DE017D631 F3, serialNumber=9995A79B765CF420033A1CBAAFF5461F718D61 8BA2FDCA70E412F27FFE6E8CB0, cn=ALOK GARGAV Date: 2022.01.13 10:40:02 +05'30'