Irfan Ali vs Sardar Kha And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 7728 Raj/2

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 39/2013

Irfan Ali S/o Hazi Khawaja Hasan, r/o Todaraisingh, District Tonk
(Raj.)
                                                   ----Appellant-Defendant
                                     Versus
1. Sardar Kha S/o Akbar Kha, r/o Town todaraisingh, Tehsil
Todaraisingh, District Tonk, (Raj.)
                                               .........Respondent-Plaintiff

2. Rushtam Ali S/o Gulam Mohammad, R/o Devgaun, Tehsil Kekri, District Ajmer (Raj.)

----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vijay Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijendra Kumar Yadav

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order

09/12/2022

1. Matter has come up on the application No.1/2022 under

Order 23 Rule3 CPC.

2. The counsel appearing for appellant-defendant and

respondent No.1-plaintiff jointly submit that parties have entered

into compromise and as per compromise, respondent No.1-

plaintiff has received Rs.1,60,000/- and has handed over the

possession of Godown in question to the appellant-defendant and

not to interfere with his possession. The compromise dated

12.06.2022, executed between the parties has been placed on

record alongwith the application. As per compromise, both parties

have agreed to set aside the impugned judgment and decree

dated 01.10.2012.

3. This Court vide order dated 07.12.2022 directed both parties

to appear before the Registrar (Judicial) to attest/verify the

(2 of 2) [CFA-39/2013]

compromise. The compromise has been attested by the Registrar

(Judicial) in presence of both parties identified by their respective

counsel.

4. It has been pointed out that respondent No.2 happens to be

power of attorney holder of appellant-Irfan Ali and he has no

concern with the suit property and impugned decree but since he

was party in the suit, therefore he was made party as respondent

No.2 in the appeal. During the course of first appeal, respondent

No.2 has died and an application No.26060/2016 has been filed to

take his legal representative on record.

5. With consent of learned counsel for both parties, application

No.26060/2016 is allowed. Legal representatives of deceased

respondent No.2 are substituted in his place.

Amended cause title, enclosed with application, is taken on

record.

6. Having considered the contentions of learned counsel for

both parties, the compromise dated 12.06.2022 is taken on

record.

7. Accordingly, the first appeal stands disposed of in terms of

compromise and the impugned judgment and decree dated

01.10.2012 stands quashed and set aside. The compromise shall

form part of this order.

8. Decree be framed accordingly.

9. Both applications No.1/2022 & application No.26060/2016

stand disposed of.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

TN/86

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)