AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)
When the matter is taken up for hearing, both the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent have informed the Court that the matter has been settled between the parties out of the Court.
To demonstrate that the case has been settled between the parties, the parties have filed Memorandum of Compromise, dated 10.03.2025 and accordingly, I.A.No.1 of 2025 has been filed to record the compromise between them and contended that by allowing I.A.No.1 of 2025, the present Appeal may be disposed of.
This Court, having considered the submissions made by the parties, is of the view that I.A.No.1 of 2025 and the present Appeal can be disposed of in terms of Memorandum of Compromise, dated 10.03.2025 filed by the parties.
With the above observations, I.A.No.1 of 2025 is allowed and accordingly, the Appeal is disposed of by recording the terms of the Memorandum of Compromise. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed.
That the Appeal Suit be and hereby is disposed of;
That the Respondent has no objection to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree in O.S.No.831 of 2017 dated 22-11-2019 passed by the II Additional Distret Judge. Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar;
That the Respondent is inclined to continue the Gift Deed in favour of the Appellant by declaring that the Appellant is the absolute owner of the Suit Schedule Property;
That the Respondent also relinquished her rights over the suit schedule property.
That the brother of the Appellant named Kapa Venkateswara Reddy is residing in two rooms of the part of the schedule property. He did not perform marriage. He is entitled to live in the two rooms during his life time. But the property tax should be paid by Appellant.
That the After life time of the brother of the Appellant named Kapa Venkateswara Reddy, Appellant will occupy the said two rooms.
That in case the schedule property is developed, 30% space should be allotted to the brother of the Appellant Kapa Venkateswara Reddy and he is entitled to enjoy the possession of the same during his life time without having alienation powers.
That the in case the Appellant sells the schedule property, 30% share of the sale consideration should be given to K.Venkateswara Reddy.
That the Appellant shall execute necessary register document to the effect that he has given possession of 30% share of the schedule property without having alienation powers enabling to enjoy the possession during his life time.
That the Respondent gifted one Plot No.250, extent 244.44 Sq.yards, situated at Vishnu Priya Nagar Colony, Kallur Village and Mandal, Kurnool District vide Gift Deed dated 17-08-2019 in favour of sister of Appellant named K. Rajeswari and the Appellant should not question the same in future..
That as per the understandings between the parties, the Appellant along with his brother Kapa Venkateswara Reddy sold the Plot No.418 admeasuring 277 Sq.yards, situated at Nadergul Village, Balapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District on nominal price.
That the Both this parties voluntarily signed Memorandum of Compromise without any coercion and undue influence by any one.
That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal.