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
5 paragraphs · 225 wordsL.N. Mittal, J.
CM No. 2921-C of 2011 and RSA No. 3723 of 2004
Appellants have moved CM No. 2921-C of 2011 for recording compromise and for allowing the appeal in view of compromise alleging that Appellants have effected compromise Annexure A-1 with Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 (Plaintiffs) and Respondent Nos. 5 and 12 whereas Respondent Nos. 6 to 9 are vendees of the Appellants and their interest would stand protected by the compromise whereas Respondent Nos. 10 and 11 had no interest in the property nor any relief was claimed against them in the suit. Learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and 12 admits that Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and 12 have effected compromise Annexure A-1 with the Appellants and states that the appeal be allowed in view of said compromise. The compromise is accompanied by affidavits of Appellants and Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and 12 i.e Annexures A-2 to A-9.
The appeal has thus been lawfully compromised.
Accordingly, CM No. 2921-C of 2011 is allowed. Consequently in view of compromise Annexure A-1, appeal bearing RSA No. 3723 of 2004 is allowed and judgments and decrees of both the Courts below are set aside and suit filed by Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 stands dismissed. Compromise Annexure A-1 shall form part of the judgment and decree-sheet.