CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Daljit Thakur And Another vs Laiq Ram (Since Deceased) Through His Legal Representatives, Namely, Smt. Sunita Devi And Others

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 23 March 2021 · Citation: (2021) 03 SHI CK 0196

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ajay Mohan Goel, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Section 151, Order 23 Rule 1, Order 23 Rule 2
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Regular Second Appeal No. 266 Of 2016
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 362 words

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

RSA No. 266 of 2016 & CMP No. 3238 of 2021

1.

By way of this application, filed under Order 23, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a prayer has been made that as the matter intra the parties, which has resulted in the filing of the present appeal, has been settled between them, in terms of the contents of this application, accordingly, the appeal be disposed of by taking on record the compromise so entered into between the parties and by making the contents of para­8 thereof, as part and parcel of the record. Ordered accordingly. The compromise entered into between the parties, terms whereof are spelled out in para­8 of this application, are ordered to be taken on record and the same shall form part and parcel of the record.

2.

The Civil Suit filed by the plaintiff/predecessor­in­ interest of the present respondents is permitted to be withdrawn. As a result of the suit itself being withdrawn, the judgment and decree which stood passed in favour of the plaintiff/predecessor­in­interest of the present respondents by the learned First Appellate Court, is ordered to have been rendered otiose. The present appeal filed by the defendants is permitted to be closed, as prayed for and the parties are held to be bound by the terms and conditions of the compromise, as have been entered into by way of compromise deed.

3.

As prayed for, it is ordered that Gift Deed, dated 12.01.2011 set up by the defendants, is held to be null and void and Revenue Authorities are directed to enter the mutation with regard to the suit land in favour of the present respondents/successors­in­interest of the original plaintiff.

4.

The Revenue Authorities are further directed to carry out the necessary corrections in the revenue record, as expeditiously as possible, post the parties apply for the same and not later than six weeks as from the date the parties move an appropriate application in this regard before the authorities concerned.

5.

In view of the above, the application stands disposed of, so also the appeal and pending miscellaneous applications, if any.