JUDGMENT H.N. Agarwal, M. - This is a petition for review of this court's order dated March 31, 1976 passed in second appeal No. 367 of 1968-69/Sultanpur. 2. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and have gone through the records. 3. Smt. Ganga Devi had filed a suit under Section 202, U.P.Z.A. and L.R. under Section 202, U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act against Ambika and Rama Shanker claiming that she was a widow for the last 40 years and had given the land in suit which was here Bhumidhari and Sirdari to the defendants for cultivation who had become Asami thereof. She now wanted to bring the land under her own cultivation, but the defendants were not willing to relinquish possession. The trial, court decreed the suit. The trial court's order was upheld by the lower appellate court as well as by this court in the second appeal. 4. During the pendency of the second appeal Smt. Ganga Devi died on March 27, 1972. An application was filed by Bhimal, Hanuman, Kamla, Ram Shoroman and Udit claiming to be the heirs of Smt. Ganga Devi being sons of the brothers of the husband of deceased. On the other hand, an objection was filed by Ambika Prasad and Rama Shanker to the effect that Smt. Ganga Devi died heir-less and these persons were not her heirs. The matter was thereafter referred to the trial court which sent its report on September 22, 1972 to the effect that Bhimal and others were in fact the heirs of Smt. Ganga Devi. The trial court also stated that both parties had filed a compromise which was forwarded. 5. By an apparent omission the above report of the trial court could not be considered.by this court while delivering the judgment. This has necessitated the present review. 6. I find that Smt. Ganga Devi, the original plaintiff having died, Bhimal and others have become her heirs as reported by the trial court. The contesting parties duly filed a compromise verified by their counsels on September 22, 1972 before the trial court. It has not been shown that this compromise was in any way.fraudulent. It is, therefore, no longer permissible for any party to resile from the compromise. 7. Accordingly I hereby recall my order dated March 31, 1976 and decide the appeal in terms of the compromise which shall form part of the decree. It has not been shown that this compromise was in any way.fraudulent. It is, therefore, no longer permissible for any party to resile from the compromise. 7. Accordingly I hereby recall my order dated March 31, 1976 and decide the appeal in terms of the compromise which shall form part of the decree. Bhimal and others shall also be substituted on the record as heirs of Smt. Ganga Devi.