Judgment: 1. I.A. No. 7065/2014 is filed jointly by both the parties under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC recording a compromise and parties pray for disposal of the appeal in terms of the aforesaid compromise and it is submitted that as the parties have amicably settled all the dispute they do not want to prosecute this appeal any further and are desirous of getting the matter settled in terms of the aforesaid settlement. 2. We have gone through the application filed under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC i.e. I.A. No. 7065/2014 and it is seen that a compromise has been recorded in the said application and the said application is signed by appellants 1 to 4 namely, Ramrati, Brijmohan, Manmohan, Smt. Genda Bai appellant No. 4(i), Shiv Shankar Verma appellant No. 4(ii), Manoj Verma appellant No. 4(iii), Poonam Verma appellant No. 4(iv) and Kedar appellant No. 4(v). It is also signed by Smt. Madhuri Singh respondent No. 1(1), Rahul Singh respondent No. 1(2) and Ku. Neha Singh respondent No. 1(3). Brijmohan and Manmohan who are present in the Court testify that all the appellants have subscribed of the settlement and the signatures and thumb impression of the appellants are correct and they identify the same. Similarly respondents No. 1(2) and 1(3) Rahul Singh and Ku. Neha Singh also accepts the settlement and they say that settlement is also signed by respondent No. 1(1) Smt. Madhuri Singh and they testify her signature. Counsel appearing for the parties also say that the dispute has been amicably resolved in terms of the settlement recorded in I.A. No. 7065/2014 and they also certify the signatures of the parties bearing in the same. 3. In view of the same, we find that the dispute has been settled and the appeal can be disposed of in terms of the settlement. 4. 3. In view of the same, we find that the dispute has been settled and the appeal can be disposed of in terms of the settlement. 4. Accordingly as agreed to by the parties, the following compromise between the parties are recorded:- a) that the plaintiffs/appellants admit that the sale deed dated 24.12.1982 executed by defendants 2 to 4/respondents 2 to 4 in favour of original defendant No. 1/respondent No. 1 Diwakar Pratap Singh is valid and legal with respect to 0.40 acre of land comprised therein; c) that out of the total area of 0.47 acre comprised in Khasra No. 209 the defendant No. 1(2)/respondent No. 1(2) Rahul Singh shall be the exclusive owner of 0.35 acre of land as shown by red colour in the man annexed to this application and the appellants shall never claim any right, title or interest therein; d) that the plaintiffs/appellants shall be the exclusive owners of the remaining 0.12 acre of land of Khasra No. 209 land as shown by blue colour in the map annexed to this application and the respondents shall never claim any right, title or interest therein; e) that the defendants 2 to 4/respondents 2 to 4 were ex-parte before the Courts below and the present compromise does not effect their interests in the suit property in any manner and the same can very well be recorded in their absence; f) that the parties shall bear their own expenses of the litigation as incurred throughout. 5. The appeal is accordingly disposed of in terms of the aforesaid settlement. A modified decree be passed in terms of the settlement and application I.A. No. 7065/2014 be made part of the Decree.