Mr. Lalit Sharma vs Rohit Kakkad And
2023 Latest Caselaw 848 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                        COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  IA No. 16497 of 2023
                                  In
                                  FA No. 240 of 2019
                                  Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant.

Mr. C.K. Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents.

of 2018, Smt. Ritu Jhamb Vs. Rohit Kakkad and others, stood instituted before the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar. The said Suit was contested on merits and it was decided by the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Khatima, vide judgment dated 24th September, 2019, whereby, the Suit of the plaintiff and the counter claim of the defendants were rejected, and accordingly, a decree has been formulated.

It is that during the pendency of this First Appeal, that the parties have entered into a compromise by invoking the provisions contained under Order 23 Rule 3 to be read with Section 151 of the CPC. The application thus filed under Order 23 Rule 3 of the CPC, apart from the fact, that it has been duly endorsed by the counsels, who are authorized as per the aforesaid provisions, to enter into a compromise on behalf of their respective clients. The Compromise Application has also been signed by the respective parties to the present First Appeal.

The terms of the settlement has been narrated in the compromise deed, which has been placed on record as an affidavit in support of the Compromise Application.

The factum of execution of compromise is not a fact denied by either of the parties or their counsels. Since the compromise has been entered into between the parties, and it takes a shape of decree as of now, and since it has been submitted in an Appeal under Section 96 of the CPC, the First Appeal would stand decided in terms of the compromise dated 16th March, 2023, and accordingly, the impugned judgment and decree dated 24th September, 2019, would stand modified and would be decided in terms of the compromise as referred to in the Compromise Application.

The Registry of this Court is directed to formulate a degree in terms of the compromise, for the purposes of deciding the Suit No. 16 of 2018, Smt. Ritu Jhamb Vs. Rohit Kakkad and Others, which will constitute a decree as of now in relation to Suit No. 16 of 2018.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) Dated 28.03.2023 Shiv