Shitla Prasad Yadav and Another vs Faridan and Others

S.P. Mehrotra, J.—List has been revised. Learned Counsel for the parties are not present.

The aforementioned application has been filed on behalf of Shitla Prasad and Kashi Nath, plaintiff-appellant Nos. 1 and 2, respectively in the second appeal.

It is, inter alia, prayed in the aforementioned application that the second appeal be dismissed, as the matter has ''been compromised amicably between the parties outside the Court.

The aforementioned application is supported by a joint affidavit, sworn on 18.5.1992 by the said Shitla Prasad (plaintiff-appellant No. 1) and the said Kashi Nath (plaintiff-appellant No. 2).

It is, inter alia, stated in the said affidavit that the parties in the second appeal have compromised the dispute outside the Court ; and that the plaintiffs-appellants do not want to peruse the second appeal any further ; and that the plaintiffs-appellants want that the second appeal be dismissed.

Copy of the aforementioned application was served on the learned Counsel for the respondents on 19.5.1992, whereupon the learned Counsel for the respondents made endorsement of no objection on the aforementioned application.

In view of the averments made in the aforementioned application and its accompanying affidavit, I am of the opinion that the prayer made in the aforementioned application deserves to be granted.

Accordingly, the second appeal is dismissed as not pressed.

The interim order dated 12.10.1984, as confirmed by the order dated 2.2.1988, stands vacated.

It is made clear that no liberty is being given for filing fresh second appeal on the same cause of action.