Basudeo Mahto v. Rajendra Pd. And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

First Appeal No.426 of 1989 ====================================================== Basudeo Mahto .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

Rajendra Pd. & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Harendra Prasad Singh -1` For the Respondent/s : Mr. Jitendra Pd. Shahi Mr. Jitendra Prasad Singh Mr. Niraj Kumar Mr. Braj Bhushan Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 13-10-2015 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondent on interlocutory application No.6170 of 2015. The office earlier pointed out that in this compromise application, the appellant No.2 has not singed. For removal of the said defects, the parties have filed I.A. No.8260 of 2015 wherein it is stated that the appellant No.2 had also died leaving behind his legal representatives who have signed the compromise application at flag 'A'.

In view of the above, this interlocutory application No.8260 of 2015 is allowed and the defect is hereby ignored. The learned counsels for the appellant and the learned counsels for the respondent submitted that both the parties have

Patna High Court FA No.426 of 1989 (27) dt.13-10-2015 2/2 compromised their dispute outside the Court and have filed this compromise application under Order 23 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

It appears that partition suit was filed by the plaintiffs appellants. The defendants respondents contested the suit and ultimately the suit was dismissed by the Court below. Against the said Judgment and Decree, the plaintiff has filed this First Appeal. From perusal of the compromise application at paragraph 6 & 7, it appears that the terms and conditions have been mentioned in detail and copy has also been attached accordingly. There is no impediment in recording the compromise arrived at between the parties.

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case that both the parties have already compromised their dispute outside the Court and there is no impediment in recording the compromise, I accept the compromise application being I.A. No.6170 of 2015. Accordingly, this First Appeal is decreed in terms of compromise application, i.e., I.A. No.6170 of 2015. The compromise application shall form part of the decree. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) U