Boorle Ramesh And Others vs Vemuri Hemalatha

T. Mallikarjuna Rao, J

I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2024 are filed by the petitioners/appellants/defendants seeking to withdraw the A.S.No.84 of 2023 in view of the terms and conditions of the compromise.

The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.33 of 2018 for specific performance of suit agreement of sale 22.12.2017 against the defendants 1 to 3, who are the appellants in the present appeal. The defendants 2 and 3 were added as parties to the suit as per I.A.No.514 of 2022 dated 21.01.2022.

A perusal of the record shows that a registered Gift Deed dated 30.08.2019 in favour of the 2nd defendant and on the very next day i.e. on 31.08.2019 a registered Simple Mortgage Deed were executed in favour of 3rd defendant. As such, D.2 and D.3 were brought on record as parties to the suit.

The learned II Additional District Judge at Parvathipuram (hereinafter referred to as “the trial Court”) decreed the suit with costs on 13.09.2022 by granting suit for specific performance, directed the defendants 1 to 3 to execute Registered Sale Deed in respect of the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiff, who is the respondent herein and put her in possession within three (3) months and directed the plaintiff to deposit the balance of sale consideration in terms of the agreement of sale dated 22.12.2017 within three months. Aggrieved by the said decree and judgment, the defendants 1 to 3 preferred this appeal.

At this juncture, it seems that D.1 and D.2 settled the matter with the plaintiff. The 1st petitioner, the 2nd petitioner represented by his GPA holder B. Madhuri and Vemuri Hemalatha (plaintiff) are present. The 3rd petitioner/3rd defendant/3rd appellant is not present.

Learned counsel for the petitioners filed a Memo stating that the 3rd appellant is the Mortgager and her claim was settled by the other appellants. As such, the 3rd appellant is not a necessary party to the proceedings. Thus, the petitioners are intended to be recorded compromise between the parties i.e. 1st appellant, 2nd appellant and the plaintiff.

Along with the I.A.No.3 of 2024, a Memorandum of Understanding for full and final settlement is filed. On behalf of the 1st petitioner-Burle Kishore Kumar, he has executed GPA in favour of his wife Istam Madhuri @ B.Madhuri and she is present on behalf of 2nd petitioner to the Memorandum of Understanding. One Vemuri Hemalatha, who is the respondent/plaintiff in the appeal admitted that in pursuance of the compromise she received an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs only) in total as referred in the Memorandum of Understanding. According to the terms of the compromise, the respondent/plaintiff is entitled to receive an amount of Rs.14,60,000/-which is in the deposit of II Additional District and Sessions Court at Parvathipuram in E.P.No.2 of 2023 in O.S.No.33 of 2018, for which, the 1st party has reported „No Objection‟.

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, both parties in the appeal are present and they are identified by their learned counsel. The terms and conditions of compromise are read over to the parties and they are admitted as true and correct.

On being satisfied with the terms and conditions of compromise and in view of the amicable settlement made by both parties, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2024 are allowed and consequently the appeal is disposed of by setting aside the decree and judgment dated 13.09.2020 in O.S.No.33 of 2018 on the file of II Additional District Judge at Parvathipuram in terms of compromise. There shall be no order as to costs.

Registry is directed to annex a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding to this Judgment.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.