Krishna Bai vs Keshar Bai
2023 Latest Caselaw 3135 MP

                             1
 IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                    AT JABALPUR
                         BEFORE
      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
                ON THE 21 st OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                   FIRST APPEAL No. 39 of 2007

BETWEEN:-
1.    KRISHNA BAI WIFE OF PREMSUKH GADARI,
      AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O WARD NO.3,
      KANKALI  MOHALLA,   SEHORA  (MADHYA
      PRADESH)

2.    PREMSUKH S/O SURAJ PRASAD GADARI, AGED
      ABOUT 43 YEARS, WARD NO.3, KATRA MOHALLA,
      SEHORA (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.    HARBHAJANLAL S/O GAYADEEN, AGED ABOUT 57
      YEARS, R/O MALVIYAGANJ, KATNI, TAHSIL &
      DISTRICT KATNI (MADHYA PRADESH)

4.    SHRIKANT S/O KUNJILAL BAJAJ, AGED ABOUT 37
      YEARS, R/O HANUMANGANJ, KATNI (MADHYA
      PRADESH)

5.    RAJKUMAR S/O SHIKHARCHAD JAIN, AGED
      ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O SAWARKAR WARD, KATNI
      (MADHYA PRADESH)

6.    SUBHAG S/O SUBHASH JAIN, AGED ABOUT 20
      YEARS, R/O SAWARKAR WARD, KATNI (MADHYA
      PRADESH)

                                                   .....APPELLANTS
(BY NONE)

AND
1.    KESHAR BAI WIFE OF RAGHUVAR GADARI, AGED
      ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE BHARAULI,
      TAHSIL - BAHORIBAND, DISTT. KATNI (MADHYA
      PRADESH)

2.    DEVWATI WIDOW OF CHARAN GADARI, AGED
      ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE BHARAULI,
      TAHSIL BAHORIBAND, DISTT. KATNI (MADHYA
                                    2
      PRADESH)

3.    GUDDU S/O SURAJ GADARI, AGED ABOUT 38
      YEARS,    R/O VILLAGE PALI (MAJHGAWAN),
      TAHSIL SEHORA (MADHYA PRADESH)

4.    SUMAN BAI W/O HIMANCHAL GADARI, AGED
      ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O NEAR HARDOL MANDIR,
      BALDEOBAGH, JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

5.    GAISA BAI WIFE OF GUDDA, AGED ABOUT 32
      YEARS, R/O VILLAGE KIRHAI PIPARIA, TAHSIL
      BAHORIBAND,    DISTT.  KATNI    (MADHYA
      PRADESH)

6.    SURAJ S/O ACHCHELAL GADARI, AGED ABOUT 62
      YEARS,     R/O PALI (MAJHGAWAN), TAHSIL
      SEHORA (MADHYA PRADESH)

7.    LAXMAN SEN PATWARI HALKA NO. 66, THROUGH
      : TAHSILDAR, SEHORA, DISTRICT JABALPUR
      (MADHYA PRADESH)

8.    STATE   OF    M.P. THROUGH             COLLECTOR,
      JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
(BY NONE)

      T h is appeal coming on for order this day, t h e cou rt passed the
following:
                                 JUDGMENT

This First Appeal under Section 96 of CPC has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 23/12/2006 passed by Additional District Judge, Sihora, District Jabalpur (M.P.) in Civil Suit No.17A/2005.

I.A. No.11431/2022, an application under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC read with Section 151 of CPC has been filed seeking permission to compromise the suit.

Accordingly, this Court by order dated 28/11/2022 had directed the parties to appear before the Registrar (Judicial-1) for verification of factum of compromise.

The Registrar (Judicial-1) after verifying the compromise has given the following report:-

"To verify the compromise, statements of Appellant no.1 & 2 and Respondent no.1 & 2 have been recorded. Both the parties submit that they are ready and willing to resolve their dispute voluntarily with free consent and without undue pressure, coercion, duress and they have put their signature/ thumb impression on the I.A. No.11431/2022 filed under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC with their own will and without any pressure or fear and after understanding the same clearly by their counsel. I.A. No.11431/2022 alongwith affidavit of Appellant no.1 and Respondent no.1 is already on record.

In the light of the aforesaid factual position, it is clear that the Appellant no.1 & 2 and Respondent no.1 & 2 have compromised voluntarily without any undue influence or pressure. Both Appellant no.1 & 2 and Respondent no.1 & 2 are competent, mentally sound and major to enter into compromise. The compromise application is signed by Appellant no.3 to 6 but they are not present for compromise."

The respondents No.1 and 2 had filed a suit for declaration that the Will executed in favour of the appellant No.1- Krishna Bai is null and void. The suit was decreed. Now the respondents No.1 and 2 have agreed to admit the title of appellant No.1- Krishna Bai. Although the counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 did not participate in the mediation proceedings and also did not appear when the case was called but the Registrar (Judicial-1) has recorded his satisfaction about the voluntariness of the respondents No.1 and 2 and the appellants No.1 and 2. The non-appearance of the other parties before the mediation has no adverse effect because they are the subsequent purchasers. If the title of Krishna Bai is upheld then the sale-deeds executed in favour of the other parties would automatically stand upheld.

In view of the report submitted by the Registrar (Judicial-1), I.A. No.11431/2022 filed under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC read with Section 151 of CPC is hereby allowed and thus, in the light of the statements made by respondents No.1 and 2, namely, Smt. Keshar Bai and Devwati, the suit filed by the plaintiffs, namely Smt. Keshar Bai and Devwati is hereby dismissed as

withdrawn.

As a consequence thereof, the Will dated 20/05/1993 executed by Late Smt. Neema Bai in favour of Krishna Bai is held to be valid and the respondents shall not have any claim in the property sold to defendants No.3 to 6.

Accordingly, the judgment and decree dated 23/12/2006 passed by Additional District Judge, Sihora, District Jabalpur (M.P.) in Civil Suit No.17A/2005, is set aside.

The appeal succeeds and is hereby allowed.

Decree be drawn accordingly.

(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE shubhankar Digitally signed by SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Date: 2023.02.24 13:29:28 +05'30'