Deo Narayan Sharma vs The State of Jharkhand and Others

R.K. Merathia, J.

I.A. No. 1863 of 2010

Mr. Ambastha on instruction from Mr. Amar Kumar Sinha, appearing for petitioner and Mr. Abhay Kumar Mishra, appearing for respondent No. 5, submitted that the parties have settled the disputes outside the Court on the terms and conditions as mentioned in Paragraph-2 to 11 of this I.A. which reads as follows:

That the Land bearing plot No. 897 area 8 Kathas 10 Dhurs appertaining to Jamabandi No. 16 of Mouza Ghat Rasikpur P.S. Dumka Town, stand recorded in the name of Saukhi Mian the last survey settlement of Mr. Gantzer''s.

That as the land in question had become barren land the payment of rent had become burdensome for the R.T. Saukhi Mian so he transferred the land measuring 8 Kathas 10 Dhurs out of total area of 1 Bigha 9 Kathas 1 Dhur of the plot in question long ago, before the S.P. Tenancy Act, 1949 came into forces to the petitioner Deo Narayan Sharma for construction of the workshop and residential house over the said land since many years ago.

That the disputed land in question had become barren and non cultivated from agriculture purpose since before 1941.

That the part of land area 8 Kathas 10 Dhurs out of total area plot No. 897, J.B. No. 16, Mouza Ghat Rasikpur, District Dumka was given to the appellant Deo Narayan Sharma by Saukhi Mian, recorded tenant of the said plot and Jamabandi out of affection and good relation for residential purpose by way of executing ''Kurphanama'' by the R.T. Appellant Deo Narayan Sharma was landless person.

That Gunia Bibi daughter of late Saukhi Mian had died during the pendency of the case and she had no issue.

That the petitioner thus constructed pucca house, upon the said land meas ruing 8 Kathas 10 Dhurs that is a substantial structure and building thereof and are residing therein since then.

That the house constructed thereupon and residence etc. are proved by the records of CO. not once by twice and R.T.S. or his heirs have never made any objection against the petitioner and they have also now agreed in this compromise petition, that if they are paid suitable compensation for their land, they shall not make any objection against the residential building structure made upon their lands.

That good relations have prevailed in between the parties and as because they were fighting out the case since long and now they do not want to prolong this litigation any more hence they have agreed to receive compensation of Rs. 1,05,000/ - (Rs. One Lac Five Thousand only) for the lands involved in this and the petitioner is ready to pay the said amount immediately as provided under schedule area regulation No. 1 of 1989.

That it is stated that both the parties have compromised the case voluntarily out of their own sweet free will without any fraud, coercion and undue influence and misrepresentation from any corner and there is no legal impediment in recording the compromise on the terms and conditions mentioned above.

That it is stated that it has further been agreed by the respondent No. 5 Md. Samjad will not take any step for execution of order passed in R.M.R. 39/1990-91 dated 7.3.2006 and also he had agreed not file any execution proceeding against the order passed by the learned S.D.O., Dumka dated 23.10.1984 passed in R.E. Case No. 94/1976-77.

State counsel has got no objection to such compromise.

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties as noted above.