DAL SINGAR Vs. DAYA RAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for appellant as well as Mr. Hari Om Pandey, learned counsel for respondent no. 1 and perused the records.

(2.) This second appeal has been filed under section 100 CPC against the judgment and decree dated 12.12.2015 passed in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2012 (Daya Ram v. Mangru and others ) arising out of the interlocutory order dated 19.7.2012 passed in Regular Suit No. 10 of 2011 (Daya Ram v. Mangru and others ).

(3.) As per given facts of the case, as borne out from the record, the respondent no. 1 being defendant had filed a suit for permanent injunction along with application under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 CPC which was registered as Regular Suit No. 10 of 2011. As per the appellant, the land in question is the ancestral property of the appellant and the respondents and since demise of his father Tulsi and grandfather Sukhari the appellant was in possession over the land in dispute. The appellant along with his brother respondent no. 2, Mangru used to tie their cattle, store the kharpatwar and ghoora and also store kanda and they used to come from home to the land in dispute without any hindrance. The respondent no. 1 had filed a suit claiming the rightful possession over the land in dispute. The application under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 CPC filed in the suit was rejected by the Trial Court after hearing the parties vide order dated 19.7.2012. The respondent no. 1, Daya Ram had preferred the appeal before the lower appellate Court which was registered as Misc. Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2012. During pendency of appeal, the parties to the case had agreed to enter into a compromise and, as such, in the National Lok Adalat held on 12.12.2015 they had entered into a compromise deed before the Court concerned, the same was accepted and the compromise deed was numbered as 22ka1. The appellate Court accepted the compromise deed and has decided the appeal as well as Regular Suit No. 10 of 2011 in terms of the compromise deed, 22ka-1.