RADHA KISHAN Vs. SOHAN PAL 74

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed against the order dated 20. 1. 83 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 2, Alwar in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 6/78, whereby the application of the petitioner for recording compromise between the parties was rejected.

(2.) THE plaintiff non-petitioner filed a suit for specific performance against the defendants No. 2 and 3 in respect of the residential property which was alleged to have been sold to the plaintiff for Rs. 5200/, in respect of which Rs. 2000/- were paid as advance. An application for issue of ad-interim injunction order under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 C. P. C. was also filed by the non-petitioner, which was granted. Against this, an appeal was filed by the petitioner, which is pending before the learned Additional Distt. Judge No. 2, Alwar. During the pendency of the above appeal, an application was filed on 21. 12. 81 stating that the parties have arrived at a compromise which was recorded in writing containing the fact that the plaintiff non-petitioner has received Rs. 3000/- against his claim in the suit from Shri Chaturbhuj, father of petitioner Radha Kishan. THE plaintiff filed reply to the same and raised some objections stating, inter alia, that the alleged compromise was entered into between him and Shri Chaturbhuj father of the defendant and it was not a compromise between the parties in the suit. However, he did not deny the execution of the compromise. Learned Addl. district Judge vide its order dt. 20. 1. 83 rejected the application filed by the petitioner on the ground that under the provisions of Rule 3 of Order 23, C. P. C. it was mandatory that the compromise should have been entered into in writing between the parties in the suit and since this compromise was not executed between the parties to the suit, it cannot be said that the same has been entered into between the parties.

(3.) THE will be no order as to costs , .