Smt. Kusum Verma and Others vs Gopal Krishna Arya

Brij Kishore Dube, Judge

Heard on I.A. No. 3817/2012, an application under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Sections 89 & 151 of CPC for compromise. Learned counsel present on behalf of both the parties submits that the parties have entered into compromise, therefore, the appeal may be disposed of in terms of the compromise.

From a perusal of the record, it is clear that the compromise petition is signed by all the appellants as well as the respondent.

Learned counsel for the parties have verified the signature of the parties on the compromise petition. Respondent, Gopal Krishna Arya & appellants, Smt. Kusum Verma, Santosh Verma, Rajeev Verma and Manjula Verma have submitted their affidavit in support of the compromise.

In view of the averments made in the compromise petition and the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, it is borne out from the record that the appellants/defendants and the respondent/plaintiff have entered into compromise voluntarily outside the Court, therefore, it is accorded and the appeal stands disposed of in the following terms:

(i) That, the tenants/appellants admit that the grounds of Eviction as provided for in Sections 12(1)(a),(c), (e) & (o) of the Accommodation Control Act are available to the respondent/landlord. The respondent has bona fide requirement of the suit property for residential purpose and that he has no other equally suitable residential accommodation of his own in his occupation in Greater Gwalior. The tenants also admit that there has been irregularity in payment of rents despite notice for demand of arrears of the rent;

(ii) The tenants also admit that they had taken possession of such portions of accommodation which is not included in accommodation let to them and the same was not vacated despite notice of the landlord in that behalf. The tenants also admit that due to the said conduct had adversely and substantially affected the interest of the landlord;

(iii) That, in the light of the above decree of eviction may be passed in favour of the landlord/respondent on the aforesaid grounds as provided for in Sections 12(1)(a),(c),(e) & (o) of the Accommodation Control Act. The map of the suit property attached with the plaint and amended later, shall be part and parcel of the decree;

(iv) That, appellants/tenants agree that they shall hand over vacant peaceful possession of the suit premises (comprised in para 1 and 5 of the plaint and in the amended map, forming part and parcel of the plaint which is within 3 months from the date of this application to the respondent/landlord;

(v) That, landlord/respondent admits that the appellants/tenants had spent considerable sum on maintenance of the suit property. The appellants deserve to be reimbursed for the said sum. The respondent/landlord has paid the said agreed sum to the tenants/appellants who have received the same in full and final satisfaction, out of the court.

(vi) That, the respondent shall be free to withdraw the amounts deposited by the appellants during pendency of litigation;

(vii) That, the parties shall not claim any other amount from each other. Parties shall bear their own costs.

(viii) That, in case if the appellants do not handover the vacant, peaceful possession of the suit premises to the respondent/landlord within three months'' stipulated time, then the execution of the decree shall be done expeditiously and the appellants shall be liable to pay monthly mesne profit of Rs. 10,000/- per month till the date of delivery of possession of the suit property to the respondent/landlord.

(ix) That, the judgment and decree dated 31/07/09 by II Additional District Judge, Gwalior, in Civil Appeal No. 13-A/09 and judgment and decree dated 27/02/09 passed by XI Civil Judge, Class-II, Gwalior in Civil Suit No. 113-A/09, stand modified;

(x) That, the compromise petition (I.A. No. 3817 of 2012) be made part of the decree; and

(xi) That, the decree be drawn accordingly.

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.