Augustian Balasubramonyan, Varthini Sakthi and Achiyammal Lakshmi Ammal vs Nagammal, Lekshmi Ammal Valli Ammal, Arun Kumar and Jayanthi

M. Sasidharan Nambiar, J.—First Respondent is the Plaintiff. Appellants are Defendants 5 and 6 and legal heirs of the first Defendant. First Respondent instituted O.S. 169 of 1998 on the file of Principal Munsiff Court, Neyyattinkara for declaration of title and permanent prohibitory injunction. The suit was dismissed. First Respondent challenged the judgment before Sub Court, Neyyattinkara in A.S. 53 of 2000. Learned Sub Judge allowed the appeal and granted a decree declaring the title of the first Respondent to the plaint B schedule property and restrained the first Defendant by a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction, though first Defendant was no more at that time. As first Defendant died, 7th Respondent was impleaded as legal heir in the first appeal. Defendants 5 and 6 and the legal heir of first Defendant, challenged the judgment in this appeal. Appeal was admitted formulating substantial questions of law.

Subsequently parties have settled the disputes amicably. I.A. 1131 of 2011 is filed under Rule 3 of Order XXIII of CPC for recording the compromise stating that entire disputes were settled and first Respondent Plaintiff agreed to withdraw the claim and Appellants and Respondents agreed to sell the remaining property, excluding the properties described in Clause (iii) and (iv). The compromise petition is signed by all the parties and their counsel.

Compromise is recorded. Appeal is disposed in terms of the compromise. The decree granted by Sub Court, Neyyattinkara in A.S. 53 of 2000 stands set aside. The compromise petition forms part of the decree.