Yagna Narayana Reddy v. Posham Ramdas

THE HON' BLE SRI JUSTI CE CHALLA KODANDA RAM I .A.No.2 of 2019 in/ and SECOND APPEAL No.234 of 2012 I .A.No.1 of 2019 in/ and SECOND APPEAL No.235 of 2012 COMMON JUDGMENT:

Second Appeal No.234 of 2012 is emanating from the Judgment and Decree dated 20.12.2011 passed by the II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar, at Hyderabad (for short, 'the appellate Court') in Appeal Suit No.62 of 2009. By the impugned Judgment and Decree, the appellate Court reversed the Judgment and Decree dated 09.03.2009 passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District (for short, 'the trial Court') in O.S.No.873 of 2004.

Likewise, Second Appeal No.235 of 2012 is emanating from the Judgment and Decree dated 20.12.2011 passed by the appellate Court in Appeal Suit No.61 of 2009. By the impugned Judgment and Decree, the appellate Court reversed the Judgment and Decree dated 09.03.2009 passed by the trial Court in O.S.No.873 of 2004.

The appeals were admitted on 05.03.2012, directing the parties to maintain status quo obtaining as on that day. Now, the matters are listed at the instance of learned counsel for both the parties, stating that the parties have arrived at an amicable solution to the dispute. In accordance with the same, I.A.No.1 of 2019 and I.A.No.2 of 2019 are filed in S.A.No.235 of 2012 and S.A.No.234 of 2012, respectively, praying the Court to permit the parties to compromise the matter as per the terms of compromise enumerated in the respective Compromise Memoranda

ia_2_2019 in/and S.A.No.234 of 2012 ia_1_2019 in/and S.A.No.235 of 2012 CKR, J filed along with the applications. It is further submitted that respondents 1, 3 and 4 (as shown in I.A.No.2 of 2019 in S.A.No.234 of 2012) have alienated the property in favour of respondents 2 and 5 shown in the said application, and, therefore, respondents 2 and 5 viz., A. Ramesh S/o A. Ramulu, and Smt. A. Padma, w/o A. Ramesh are the only interested parties in both these second appeals.

Both the parties are present before the Court and they are identified by their respective counsel. Both the learned counsel submit that the parties have amicably settled the matter and mutually agreed to abide by the terms of the compromise dated 23.07.2019 and, therefore, pray the Court that the second appeals may be disposed of by recording the compromise entered into between the parties.

In those circumstances, both the applications viz., I.A.No.2 of 2019 in S.A.No.234 of 2012, and I.A.No.1 of 2019 in S.A.No.235 of 2012, are allowed, and the second appeals are disposed of by recording the compromise. The Terms of Compromise dated 23.07.2019 filed in support of I.A.No.2 of 2019 in S.A.No.234 of 2012, and I.A.No.1 of 2019 in S.A.No.235 of 2012 shall form part of the order and record. No costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTI CE CHALLA KODANDA RAM 13th August, 2019 KSM

ia_2_2019 in/and S.A.No.234 of 2012 ia_1_2019 in/and S.A.No.235 of 2012 CKR, J THE HON' BLE SRI JUSTI CE CHALLA KODANDA RAM I .A.No.2 of 2019 in/ and SECOND APPEAL No.234 of 2012 I .A.No.1 of 2019 in/ and SECOND APPEAL No.235 of 2012 13th August, 2019 KSM