ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 2 nd July, 2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur in S.B.Civil First Appeal No. 15 of 2009. 3. The singular grievance in this appeal is about the manifest error committed by the High Court in not deciding the joint application dated 6 th January, 2015 filed by the parties for recording settlement. While dealing with that application, the High Court in the impugned judgment has merely recorded as follows: "15. So far as compromise is concerned, it is revealed that the matter was referred to Mediator, Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur where a compromise was arrived at. But the said compromise was not attested by the Court. Since the said compromise was not attested by the Court as per Order 23 Rule 3 CPC, it will not be binding on the parties. All the applications, which are pending in this regard, stand disposed of." 4. The grievance is that in terms of the proviso to Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), the Court was obliged to examine all aspects of the matter arising from the application for recording settlement, including the grievance of the appellant that the appellant has already acted upon the settlement terms substantially and, after such gap of time, if the respondent was allowed to resile from the settlement then it would cause serious prejudice to the appellant. Indeed, the fact that the respondent has already availed of the benefits under the settlement has been seriously disputed by the respondent. Even this is a matter which ought to be examined by the High Court in the first place, keeping in mind the observation made in the order dated 11 th January, 2016 passed by this Court in SLP (C) No. 30 of 2016, which reads thus: "It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the disputes between the parties have been settled and the appeal was only to be disposed of in terms of the compromise dated 06.01.2015 before the Mediation Centre. However, the High court has not passed the order in that regard. However, the High court has not passed the order in that regard. We request the High Court to hear concerned parties and dispose of the appeal within a month from the date of production of copy of this order before the Registrar of High Court. The special leave petition stands disposed of. Pending application(s) if any, shall stand disposed of." (Emphasis supplied) 5. In addition, the appellant has placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Devi Prasad & Ors. vs. Vishwa Nath Prasad & Ors. [C.A. 4777 of 2009] dated 20 th July, 2009 (Annexure P16). 6. We are in agreement with the grievance made by the appellant that the High Court has failed to examine all aspects of the matter concerning the compromise/settlement, as was required to be inquired into as per the proviso to Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC. In other words, the High Court must answer all issues/contentions raised by both sides in reference to the stated application for recording settlement, as per law. 7. As a result, we set aside the impugned judgment and order and relegate the parties before the High Court for re- consideration of the joint application for settlement dated 6 th January, 2015 (Annexure P10) on its own merits in the first place, in accordance with law. 8. We request the High Court to dispose of the said application expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. All contentions available to both the parties are left open to be considered by the High Court on their own merits in accordance with law. 10. The appeal is allowed. No costs.