Suresh Kumar And Anr vs Kushal Singh And Ors

Sandeep Sharma, J

Through Video Conferencing

Instant regular second appeal filed under Section 100 CPC lays challenge to judgment and decree dated 21.5.2018, passed by the learned Additional

District Judge, Hamirpur, in Civil Appeal No. 19 of 2016, affirming the judgment and decree dated 24.2.2016, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr.

Div.), Court No.2, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P., in Civil Suit No. 120 / 2006, RBT No. 285 of 2009 & 158/12 titled Suresh Kumar and Anr. V.

Kushal Singh and Ors., whereby suit for permanent prohibitory injunction having been filed by the appellants-plaintiffs came to be dismissed.

Precisely, plaintiffs set out a case in the plaint that they have exclusive right of passage without any obstruction or nuisance over the land comprised

in Khata No. 44 min, khatauni No.79 min, khasra Nos. 1166/954/1 (old 954/793/3) area 170 Sqms., out of khasra No.1166/954, situated in Up-Mahal,

Anu, Mouza Matti Tihara Tehsil and District Hamirpur, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as the “suit landâ€) as per jamabandi for the year, 2002-03.

Plaintiffs claimed that land in question was purchased by them from the predecessor-in-interest of the defendants late Sh. Harnam Singh for a

valuable consideration vide separate sale deed. Consequent upon sale deed, possession was also given to the plaintiffs, whereupon they have also

constructed their respective houses after approval of the site/building plan by the Municipal Council Hamirpur, H.P. As per plaintiff, defendant No.1

undertook to provide passage through the land comprised in khasra No. 954/793/3, vide his separate affidavits dated 7.4.2000/11.4.2000 in favour of

the plaintiffs. Since despite there being aforesaid undertaking, defendants failed to provide passage, rather made an attempt to obstruct the passage to

the plaintiffs and as such, the plaintiffs were compelled to file suit for permanent prohibitory injunction.

While taking specific objections with regard to maintainability, cause of action and estoppel Defendants refuted the claim of the plaintiffs and

submitted that plaintiffs have Abadi over the land mentioned in the plaint, but it is totally incorrect that the defendants have agreed to give passage to

the land comprising in Khasra No. 1166/954. On the basis of pleadings as well as evidence adduced on record by the respective parties, court below

dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs

Being aggrieved and di-satisfied with the dismissal of the suit by the learned trial court, plaintiffs preferred an appeal in the court of learned

Additional District Judge, Hamirpur, but same also came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 25.5.2018. In the aforesaid background, appellants-

plaintiffs have approached this court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to allow their suit for permanent prohibitory injunction after setting

aside the judgments and decrees passed by the courts below.

Though appeal at hand was admitted on substantial questions of law No.4 and 5 as formulated at page 9 of the paper book, but during the

proceedings of the case, this Court was informed that efforts are being made inter-se parties for amicable settlement. Today, during the proceedings

of the case, Mr. Suneet Goel, learned counsel representing the plaintiffs, while making this court peruse application bearing CMP No. 162 of 2021

under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC, having been filed by the applicants/appellants, seeking therein permission to place on record compromise arrived inter-se

parties contends that since both the parties have resolved to settle their dispute amicably inter-se them, present appeal may be disposed of in terms of

the compromise.

Learned counsel for the respondents while fairly acknowledging factum with regard to compromise, as has been placed on record by them by way

of CMP No. 162 of 2021, fairly contend that since parities have agreed to resolve their dispute amicably inter-se them, they shall have no objection in

case prayer made in the aforesaid application is accepted and appeal at hand is disposed of in terms of terms and conditions contained in the

agreement.

Consequently, in view of the aforesaid development, now nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present case and present appeal is disposed of in

terms of terms and conditions contained in the compromise placed on record alongwith application bearing CMP No. 162/2020, accordingly, impugned

judgments and decrees passed by the court below are quashed and set-aside. Terms and conditions of the compromise are made part of this order and

shall be adhered to by the parties to the lis. It is made clear that in case needful in terms of terms and conditions are not done by the parties, instant

appeal would get revived. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

Copy dasti.