Madadi And Manneni Neeraja vs M. Kanchana
2022 Latest Caselaw 974 Tel

     HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI

                   I.A.NO. 1 OF 2022
                           AND
               SECOND APPEAL NO. 172 OF 2021


ORDER:

This second appeal is filed challenging the decree and

judgment in A.S. No.8 of 2018 on the file of the Additional

District and Sessions Jude, Sircilla whereby the decree and

judgment dated 15.07.2014 in O.S.No. 84 of 2014 on the file of

the Senior Civil Judge, Sircilla, is confirmed.

2. The appellant/plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that he

is absolute owner and possessor of the suit schedule properties

described in 'A & B' schedule of the plaint.

3. At hearing learned counsel for the appellant and

respondent represented that the contesting parties in the

appeal amicably settled the issues between them and entered

into compromise in terms of the memorandum of compromise.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant further submits that

originally the father of the appellant/plaintiff and respondents 1

to 3/defendants 1 to 3 had purchased the property and the

appellant/plaintiff has been claiming exclusive rights over the NTR,J SA_172_2021

suit schedule property, but the same is disputed by the

defendants 1 to 3. The plaintiff and the defendants 1 to 3 are

having rights and interest over the schedule property. The 4th

respondent is son of defendant No.1, respondents 5 and 6 are

the husbands of defendants 2 and 3 respectively and the

defendants 7 and 8 are strangers to the suit schedule property.

Thus, they are not necessary parties. However, after filing the

second appeal due to the intervention of the elders, the

contesting parties have settled the issues between them.

5. The appellant/plaintiff and respondents 1 to 3/defendants

1 to 3 are present in person and they are identified by their

counsel and the parties produced their 'aadhar cards' along with

photostat copies to prove their identification. On enquiry, the

appellant/plaintiff and the respondents 1 to 3/defendants 1 to 3

reported that they have voluntarily entered into compromise in

terms of memorandum of compromise.

6. The terms of memorandum of compromise reads as

under:

1. That it is mutually agreed and admitted that late Hanmantha

Rao i.e. father of appellant and respondents 1 to 3 during his NTR,J SA_172_2021

life time gave suit schedule A and B properties to the

appellant at the time of her marriage.

2. It is mutually agreed and admitted the suit schedule A and B

properties are rightly mutated in the name of appellant.

3. That, it is mutually agreed and admitted that the appellant

paid an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- each to the respondents 1 to

3 as per the advice of the elders to avoid future litigations, as

the appellant is in possession of schedule A & B properties and

she obtained ownership certificate of schedule "B" properties

and she obtained pattadar pass book bearing No.124432 and

she also obtained Telangana Government pass book vide

No.T19010040100 and still she is getting Rythu bandu from

the Government till today.

4. That, it is mutually agreed and admitted that the respondent

No.1 has previously received an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- in

cash and now a DD bearing No.367624 for Rs.2,00,000/- of

SBI branch, Mankammathota, Karimnagar is given to her.

5. That it is mutually agreed and admitted that the respondent

No.2 was given DD No.367625 for Rs.4,00,000/- of SBI

branch Mankammathota, Karimnagar.

6. That it is mutually agreed and admitted that the respondent

No.3 was given DD No.367626 for Rs.4,00,000/- of SBI

Branch, Mankammathota, Karimnagar.

NTR,J SA_172_2021

7. That, as per the terms and conditions of this compromise, the

respondents 1 to 3 have no claim or right against the

appellant over the suit schedule A and B properties since the

earlier judgments passed by the lower courts are not binding

on the appellant.

8. That the respondents 1 to 3 in future or at any time, shall not

make any claim against the appellant in respect of the suit

schedule A and B properties.

9. That the appeal of the appellant may be disposed off in terms

of compromise."

7. Both the parties and their counsel affirmed the contents

of the memorandum of compromise and prayed to record the

compromise between them in terms of the memorandum of

compromise.

8. Having regard to the fact that the appellant/plaintiff and

respondents 1 to 3/defendants 1 to 3 have voluntarily entered

into compromise as per the terms mentioned in the

memorandum of compromise, I.A.No. 1 of 2022 is allowed as

prayed for.

NTR,J SA_172_2021

9. In effect, the Second Appeal is disposed of in terms of the

memorandum of compromise between the parties. There shall

be no order as to costs.

10. The memorandum of compromise dated 01.02.2022, shall

form part of the record.

As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any,

pending in the appeal suit shall stand closed.

_____________________ JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI

Date:03.03.2022 ccm