Lachhman Singh vs Parkash Singh

V.K. Jhanji, J.

This is defendant''s second appeal directed against the judgment and decree of the Courts below whereby suit filed by Parkash Singh for declaration has been decreed.

In brief, the facts are that Jagir Singh son of Piara Singh was the owner of the suit land. His son Parkash Singh filed suit against his father contending that by way of family settlement, property had been given to him. A consent decree dated 10.8.1983 was passed in favour of Parkash Singh. Decree passed in favour of Parkash Singh was not reflected in the revenue records and Jagir Singh continued to be shown as owner of the property. Jagir Singh sold the suit land vide registered sale deed dated 25.5.1987 in favour of Lachhman Singh (appellant herein) for a total consideration of Rs. 16000/. On the basis of sale, mutation was sanctioned in favour of Lachhman Singh. Parkash Singh filed suit on 2.5.1988 for declaration that he is owner of the property on the basis of decree dated 10.8.1987 suffered in his favour by his father, Jagir Singh. He also sought possession of the suit land. In the suit, he challenged sale and the mutation sanctioned in favour of Lachhman Singh. Both the Courts below have decreed the suit by saying that after decree dated 10.8.1987, Jagir Singh had been left with no title, interest or right in the property and, therefore, he was not competent to transfer the property in favour of Lachhman Singh. Hence, this second appeal by defendant Lachhman Singh.

Vide order dated 26.5.1988, appeal was admitted and dispossession of the appellant Lachhman Singh was ordered to be stayed. C.M. No. 3624C of 1998 has been filed by Parkash Singh for vacating the interim order passed by this Court on 5.3.1988 as made absolute on 26.5.1988. Before the application could be decided, an application under Order 23 Rule 3, read with Section 151, Code of Civil Procedure, for passing a decree in accordance with the compromise entered into between the parties along with compromise which is marked as Mark CI, parties have settled their dispute and under the settlement, a sum of Rs. 1,53,000/ has been paid to Parkash Singh. Parkash Singh who is present in Court has admitted the receipt of Rs. 1,53,000/ in presence of his counsel. Photostat copy of the receipt has also been placed on records which is marked as Mark CII. Compromise, Mark CI has been explained in detail to Ajaib Singh, attorney of Lachhman Singh, appellant, and Parkash Singh, respondent. Both of them have admitted the correctness of the compromise.

Accordingly, in view of the compromise, Mark CI, appeal is allowed, judgment and decree of the Courts below set aside and in consequence thereof, suit of the plaintiff shall stand dismissed with no order as to costs.