Anthati Ramesh vs Ganji Ratnakumari And 4 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 791 Tel

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWARA REDDY

                        I.A.No.1 of 2023
                             In/and
                   APPEAL SUIT No.264 OF 2022


COMMON JUDGMENT:

      Heard learned counsel on both sides.        Both the parties are

present.   Enquired with the plaintiff and defendant No.5.       They

admitted that the terms of compromise filed in I.A.No.1 of 2023 are

true and correctly recorded.

      2.     As per the terms of compromise, plaintiff has agreed to

relinquish all her pleadings and claim in O.S.No.214 of 2014 on the

file of learned Principal District Judge, Ranga Reddy at L.B.Nagar in

respect of property covered by the registered Sale Deed Document

Number 2791/2012/BK-1, dated 07.06.2012 on the file of SRO

Saroornagar in favour of the appellant/defendant No.5 and also

agreed to ratify the agreement of sale-cum-GPA Document Number

4194 of 2012, dated 01.08.2012 in favour of respondent No.4 and the

Sale Deed document number 2926 of 2014, dated 25.03.2014.

Further in view of the same, the appellant/defendant No.5 has agreed

to pay Rs.15 lakhs to the respondent/plaintiff. It is agreed by her

that till today she has received Rs.12 lakhs. Today in the open Court

the appellant/defendant No.5 has handed over Demand Draft

B.No.431497 dated 09.02.2023 drawn on Karur Vysya bank, LB

Nagar Branch for the balance amount of Rs.3 lakhs to the

respondent/plaintiff and she has acknowledged the receipt of the said Demand Draft. Respondent/plaintiff has further admitted that she

has voluntarily delivered the physical possession of the suit schedule

property in favour of the appellant/defendant No.5.

3. Therefore, I.A.No.1 of 2023 is allowed and in terms of

compromise, the impugned judgment and decree dated 12.09.2022 in

O.S.No.214 of 2014 on the file of learned Principal District Judge,

Ranga Reddy at LB Nagar is modified accordingly.

4. It is also further agreed between the parties that costs if

any, deposited before the trial Court pursuant to the judgment and

decree dated 12.09.2022 in O.S.No.214 of 2014, the

appellant/defendant No.5 is entitled for the same.

5. In the result, in terms of the compromise stated above,

this Appeal Suit is allowed modifying the impugned judgment and

decree of the trial Court as indicated above. However, in the

circumstances of the case, there shall be no orders as to the costs. As

a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stands

closed.

________________________________ A.VENKATESWHARA REDDY, J 15-02-2023 SA