Noor Ahmad and Anr. vs Iftikhar Uddin

S.P. Mehrotra, J.—Case called out in the revised list.

Sri Neeraj Agarwal, learned Counsel for the defendants appellants is present. However, Sri M.A. Zaidi, learned Counsel for the plaintiffrespondent is not present.

It appears that Civil Misc. Application No. 1575 of 1990 (dated 2131990) was filed under Order XXIII, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, jointly on behalf of the defendants appellants and the plaintiffrespondent.

The said application was signed by the then learned Counsel for the defendantsappellants as well as the then learned Counsel for the plaintiffrespondent. It was, inter alia, prayed in the said application that the Second Appeal be decided in terms of compromise and the parties be directed to bear their own costs.

The said application was accompanied by an affidavit, sworn jointly by Noor Ahmad (defendantappellant No. 1) and Iftikhar Uddin (plaintiffrespondent) on 19th March 1990. Photostat copy of the compromise was filed as Annexure 1 to the said affidavit.

By the order dated 14121999, this Court directed that the compromise be sent to the Court below for its verification.

The said order dated 14121999 is reproduced below:

�The compromise has been filed by the parties and the same requires verification. Send it for its verification to the Court below. List after three months.�

Pursuant to the said order 14121999, the aforesaid application and its accompanying affidavit, including annexure thereto, in original, were sent to the Court below for verification.

In compliance with the directions given in the said order dated 14121999, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kasganj, District Etah sent a communication dated 10th March 2000 to the Registry of this Court. It was, inter alia, stated in the said communication dated 10th March 2000 that the said compromise had been verified in presence of the parties by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kasganj, District Etah.

Alongwith the said communication, the aforementioned papers sent from this Court, including copy of the compromise, were also returned to the Registry of this Court.

A perusal of the notings on the backside of Page 2 of the copy of the compromise, filed as Annexure 1 to the said affidavit accompanying the aforementioned application, shows that the parties have acknowledged having entered into the said compromise, and the same has been duly verified by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kasganj, District Etah.

In view of the aforesaid, I am of the opinion that it is in the interest of justice that the Second Appeal be decided in terms of the compromise, copy whereof has been filed as Annexure 1 to the said affidavit accompanying the aforementioned application.

The Second Appeal is, accordingly, decided in terms of the compromise, copy whereof has been filed as Annexure 1 to the said affidavit accompanying the aforementioned application. The said compromise will form part of the decree.

The parties will bear their own costs.