Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dhoom Singh vs Punnu Ram & Anr on 17 September, 2014
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Inderjit Singh
209
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.4176 of 2002 (O&M)
Date of decision: September 17, 2014
Dhoom Singh
...Appellant
Versus
Punnu Ram and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH
Present: Mr.Sunil Panwar, Advocate
for the appellant.
Mr.M.K.Mittal, Advocate
for respondent No.1.
Mr.Rahul Tanwar, Advocate for
Mr.Rishipal Rana, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
****
INDERJIT SINGH, J.
Appellant Dhoom Singh has filed this regular second appeal against Punnu Ram and Ram Chander respondents challenging the judgments and decree passed by learned trial Court and learned Appellate Court decreeing the suit of the plaintiff- respondent Punnu Ram by declaring that he is entitled to the relief of declaration as to his ownership and constructive joint possession over the suit land etc. During the pendency of the present RSA, a CM No.9413-C of 2014 has been filed under Order 23 Rule 3 read with Section 151 VINEET GULATI 2014.09.26 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh RSA No.4176 of 2002 -2- CPC for disposing of the main appeal in terms of mutual compromise dated 20.05.2014 entered into between the parties. It is stated that Punnu Ram, predecessor-in-interest of respondents No.1 (i to x) filed a suit for declaration claiming himself to be the owner of 1/9th share of the suit land measuring 175 kanals 12 marlas situated in village Badagarh, Tehsil Naraingarh District Ambala and for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 25.01.1988 passed by learned Addl. Senior Sub Judge, Ambala in civil suit No.504 of 15.12.1987 titled as 'Dhoom Singh vs. Abhan Singh', as also the consequent mutation No.1165 sanctioned on 23.11.1988 and for the consequential relief of possession of the suit land. In the said suit, Dhoom Singh (deceased appellant and predecessor-in-interest of present applicants-appellants No.1 [i to vi]) was impleaded as contesting defendant No.1 and Ram Chander (present respondent No.2) was impleaded as proforma defendant No.2. That suit was decreed in favour of Punnu Ram. The appeal filed by Dhoom Singh was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 28.03.2002 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Ambala and then RSA No.4176 of 2002 (i.e. present RSA) was filed before this Court.
Now, the parties being closely related inter se and being descendants of common ancestor namely Sh.Abhan Singh, with the assistance of common relatives and elders, have wholly adjusted the dispute between them relating to the entire subject matter of the suit/appeal and have arrived at a compromise dated 20.05.2014. The original copy of the said compromise duly signed by all the parties to VINEET GULATI 2014.09.26 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh RSA No.4176 of 2002 -3- the main appeal, has been attached. As per the compromise, LRs of deceased appellant Dhoom Singh shall pay a total amount of `33 lacs jointly to party number two (1) i.e. all the legal representatives of deceased respondent No.1 Punnu Ram and a total amount of `12 lacs to party number two (2) i.e. respondent No.2 Ram Chander.
During the hearing, counsel for the parties admitted regarding the correctness of this compromise which has been placed on the file as Annexure C-1. Counsel for the parties admitted that the compromise has been signed by all the legal heirs of the appellant and defendants etc. It is also admitted that in terms of the compromise, amounts of `33 lacs and `12 lacs have been received.
Keeping in view the compromise between the parties and the counsel representing the parties having no objection to the compromise and passing of the decree as per the terms and conditions of the compromise, the judgment and decree dated 30.11.1999 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ambala and judgment and decree dated 28.03.2002 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Ambala are set aside.
Accordingly, the present regular second appeal stands disposed of in terms and conditions of the compromise Annexure C-1.
September 17, 2014 (INDERJIT SINGH)
Vgulati JUDGE
VINEET GULATI
2014.09.26 16:15
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh