R SARASWATHI Vs. J CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the parties to the above proceedings agreed for a compromise and in pursuance of the said decision, they filed a Memo of Compromise dated 22. 03. 2006. The appellants and the respondents in both the appeals signed the memo of Compromise in token of their acceptance. The fourth respondent in both the appeals viz. , Leela Krishnan, is represented by his brothers d. Nandakumar and Sudarshan @ Sudarshana Narayanan as guardians (vide order dated 22. 03. 2006 made in CMP No. 41 5 5 of 2006 ). Though such a petition (similar to CMP No. 4155 of 2006 in OSA No. 344 of 2002) has not been filed in o. S. A. No. 345 of 2002, all the parties are agreeable for appointing tvl. D. Nandakumar and Sudarshan @ Sudarshana Narayanan as guardians of the fourth respondent in O. S. A. No. 345 of 2002 as ordered in OSA No. 344 of 2002. We accept the same.

(2.) ALL the parties to the Compromise Memo appeared before us. On going through the contents of the Memo and in view of the fact that all the parties have signed it having agreed to the terms incorporated therein, we hereby record the same.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY, O. S. A. Nos. 344 and 345 of 2002 are disposed of in terms of the Memo of Compromise dated 22. 03. 2006. Connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed. The Memo of Compromise shall form part of the decree.