DIVIYA Vs. PYARELAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNSUCCESSFUL plaintiff, who has lost from both the two Courts below has assailed the judgment and decree of the two Courts below by filing this second appeal.

(2.) THE plaintiff/appellant filed suit for declaration and possession of Bhumiswami right in respect to certain agricultural land, the description whereof has been mentioned in the plaint and in the relief clause of the plaint. The defendants denied the averments made in the plaint as a result of which the Trial Court framed necessary issues and after recording the evidence dismissed the suit. An appeal which was filed by the plaintiff before the First Appellate Court was also dismissed.

(3.) DURING the pendency of the first appeal, a compromise was arrived at between the parties out of the Court and an agreement in that regard was executed and the parties put their thumb impression agreeing the terms of the compromise. That agreement (Ex. P-1) was placed before the First Appellate Court. Since the compromise was arrived at between the parties, the plaintiff/appellant submitted an application on 6-2-1989 under Order XXIII Rule 3, CPC before the Appellate Court praying therein that since the lawful compromise had been arrived at between the parties on 4-2-1988, therefore, the decree in terms of the compromise may be passed. The terms and conditions of the compromise have been mentioned in the agreement (Ex. P-1) as well as in Para 1 of the application under Order XXIII Rule 3, CPC, which reads thus: ....Vernacular Text Ommited....