ROMESH LAL Vs. CHARANJI LAL ETC.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has arisen out of an order, dated 16 -5 -1974, passed by the Sub -Judge 1st Class, Kulu, dismissing the application of the Defendants for disposing of the suit in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties during the pendency of the suit on 21 -11 -1969.

(2.) Charanji Lal Plaintiff is the father of Romesh Lal Defendant and Plaintiff No. 2 is also the son of Charanji Lal. The Plaintiffs and the Defendant constitute a partnership. The Plaintiffs brought a suit for dissolution of partnership and for rendition of accounts. The suit was filed on 18 -11 -1969. On 21 -11 -1969 a compromise was arrived at between the parties and the compromise deed is Exhibit D. I. By this agreement it was decided that the firm shall stand dissolved with effect from 15 -12 -1969. According, to the compromise deed the Plaintiff No. 1 was to get Rs. 27,000/ - and Plaintiff No. 2 was to get Rs. 62,216/ -, i.e. Rs. 89,216/ - in all from the Defendants. The Defendants were to be owners of the assets and liabilities. Later on the Defendants made an application purporting to be one under Order 23, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 16 -3 -1970 alleging that the suit had been adjusted and that the same could not proceed and that the same be disposed of in accordance with the terms of the compromise. The Plaintiffs opposed this application and denied any adjustment. The court framed the following issue:

(3.) Before this Court Shri M.G. Chitkara, learned Counsel for the Appellants contended that once the plaintiffs -Respondents had admitted the execution of the compromise deed, Exhibit D. 1, it was not open for the Court to take into consideration the matters which were not actually recorded in the compromise. There was no date fixed in the compromise deed, enjoining upon the Defendants to make payment of the money, and on that account the Plaintiffs also could not repudiate the agreement of compromise and reliance is placed on Shrimati Sabitri Thakurain v/s. Mrs. F. A. Savi and Ors. : AIR 1933 Pat 306, which says: