Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 214 (HP)

Ranjit Singh v. Budhi Ram

2014-03-18

SANJAY KAROL

body2014
JUDGMENT Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) - CMP No. /2014 Original GPA of proposed respondents applicants No.63 & 64 has been shown to the Court. Application be registered. Applicants are impleaded as party respondents No.44 to 64, as parties on record have no objection to the same. Amended Memo of Parties is taken on record. The newly added respondents are represented by Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate. Application stands disposed of. CMP(M) No.11479/2013 2. Respondent No.4 Devi Ram expired on 6.9.2013, leaving behind his Legal Representatives, as per para-2 of the application. None has any objection to the application being allowed. As such, the application is allowed and name of deceased Devi Ram (respondent No.4) is ordered to be substituted with that of his LRs as mentioned in para-2 of the application. Ms Kiran Thakur, Advocate, has filed Power of Attorney on behalf of the LRs. Amended Memo of Parties is on record. Registry to note the same. Application stands disposed of. CMP No. /2014 & L No.73/2013 3. Special Power of Attorneys taken on record. 4. A joint application, under the provisions of Order 23, Rule 3 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure , has been filed in the Court today, which is taken on record. It be registered. 5. It is heartening to note that parties, who are 71 in number, have amicably resolved their dispute. Parties have placed on record compromise deeds dated 7.10.2013 and 29.10.2013, which are duly signed/thumb impressed by all the parties. The same are witnessed by independent witnesses. Learned counsel for the parties have also signed the application. 6. In my considered view the compromise is in accordance with the provisions of Order 23 CPC. There is no legal impediment in the same. It is also in the interest of the parties and justice. Compromise entered into between the parties is taken on record and is accepted. Parties are bound by the terms of the compromise. Undertaking of the parties in terms of the compromise is accepted and taken on record. 7. There is no legal impediment in the same. It is also in the interest of the parties and justice. Compromise entered into between the parties is taken on record and is accepted. Parties are bound by the terms of the compromise. Undertaking of the parties in terms of the compromise is accepted and taken on record. 7. Consequently, impugned judgment and decree, dated 31.7.2010, passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, in Civil Suit No.63-1 of 1997, titled as Kanshi Ram and others v. Budhi Ram and others; as affirmed by the District Judge, Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, vide judgment and decree D/d. 30.11.2012, passed in Civil Appeal No.30 of 2010, titled as Kanshi Ram and others v. Budhi Ram and others, is modified and the appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise. Both the Compromise deeds shall form part of the decree. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly. Appeal stands disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Appeal disposed of.