GULAM HUSAIN Vs. ARSHID IQBAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 17-12-2007 (Annexure-P/15) passed in M. J. C. No. 388/07 by Second Additional District Judge, Bhopal (M. P.) by which the application filed by petitioners under section 151 of C. P. C. to set aside the judgment and decree passed in Lok Adalat in Civil Suit No. 139-A/07, has been dismissed.

(2.) CIVIL Suit No. 139-A/07 was filed by respondents Arshad lqbal and Arif Siddiqui against respondents Hemraj and State of Madhya Pradesh. State of Madhya Pradesh was impleaded as proforma party defendant No. 2. The said suit was filed for specific performance of the agreement to sell entered into between the parties for a sum of Rs. 47,60,000/ -. Out of the amount Rs. 10,00,000/- was already paid. The parties entered into the compromise in the suit and application under order 23 Rules 3 read with section 151 of C. P. C. for passing a compromise decree was filed, which was signed by plaintiffs as well as by defendant No. 1 and their counsel. It was certified by the parties present before the Lok Adalat and in terms of the compromise application Lok Adalat passed the consent judgment and a decree on 6-10-2007 directing specific performance of agreement to sell.

(3.) PRESENT petitioners Gulam Husain and Gulzar Husain filed an application under section 151 read with Order 23 Rule 3 of the C. P. C. before the trial Court on 5-11-2007 for setting aside the compromise decree passed in Lok Adalat. It was submitted that they had purchased the land from Hemraj in a sum of Rs. 11,000/- vide registered sale deed dated 22-4-1977 and they are in possession of the land. They applied for mutation in November, 2006. The plaintiffs were aware of the dispute between the petitioners and the defendant No. 1. They were not impleaded as party to the suit and the compromise decree was passed.