WALAITI RAM Vs. DHARAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is plaintiff's Second Appeal whose suit was decreed by the trial Court. An appeal against the said decree of the trial Court was decided on compromise between the parties.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he was the owner-in possession as co-sharer of 11/16th share of the suit land. The trial Court decreed the suit vide judgment dated 22nd January, 1976, holding that the plaintiff had become the owner as co-sharer to the said extent. In appeal filed by the respondent/defendant, the parties entered into a compromise whereby statement of Walaiti Ram plaintiff was recorded on 2nd March, 1979, which was duly signed by him as well as by his counsel Shri J.R. Gupta, Advocate. It reads as under :-

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submitted that in the absence of any written compromise, the compromise based on the statements of the parties, as in the present case, cannot be held to be valid or legal in view of the latest Supreme Court judgment in Gurpreet Singh v. Chatur Bhuj Goel, (1988) 1 SCC 270. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/defendant submitted that the said case of the Supreme Court was clearly distinguishable, as in that case even the statement of the party was not signed by the party himself whereas in the present case the statements of the parties were duly signed by them as well as countersigned by their counsel. In support of this contention, reliance is placed on a Division Bench Judgment of this Court reported as Smt. Raksha Rani alias Raksha Devi v. Ram Lal, 1986 PLJ 639.