B ANJAMMA Vs. A PULLAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners/appellants filed these Civil Miscellaneous Petitions under Order 23 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, hereinafter in short referred to as "Code", praying for recording of compromise so far as the compromise relates to the parties specified and the properties mentioned in the appended schedules to the said compromise petitions. Objections were filed to the memorandum of compromise by the other contesting parties in the Second Appeal. It is also brought to my notice that in C.M.P. No. 22454/2001, already a similar compromise was recorded insofar as the parties specified, in the said C.M.P. are concerned. No doubt, the counsel for the objectors in the present Civil Miscellaneous Petitions had stated that the said compromise was recorded when these objectors had not entered appearance before this Court.

(2.) I had perused the terms of the compromise to be recorded by this Court in both these Civil Miscellaneous Petitions and also the schedules of the property appended to the said Civil Miscellaneous Petitions.

(3.) The facts in brief, as may be relevant for the present purpose, are as hereunder: Respondents 1 to 12 and one late Viswanadham originally filed O.S. No. 62/91 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, East & North, Ranga Reddy District at Saroornagar in respect of certain specified plots of Nagole village, UppaJ Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and the suit was dismissed and aggrieved by the said Judgment and decree, the respondents herein had carried the matter in Appeal in A.S. No. 67/98 before the II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District and pending the said Appeal even in the first appellate Court, respondents 10 and 11 had compromised with the appellants in respect of their properties such as plot No. 46 admeasuring 315 sq. yards of Nagole village, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and the appeal A.S. No. 67/98 filed by the respondents was allowed on 30-10-2000 by setting aside the Judgment and decree of the trial Court and a decree for perpetual injunction was granted against appellants in respect of the plaint schedule property except to an extent of 315 sq. yards in plot No. 46 of Nagole village and aggrieved by the same, the present Second Appeal is filed.