The court decreed the suit in terms of a compromise application filed under Order 23 Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC after recording statements confirming an out-of-court settlement between the parties.
Suit decreed in terms of compromise; court fee refunded; parties to bear their own costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CS No. 113 of 2009.
Mr. T.S. Chauhan, counsel for defendants No. 1 & 2.
Mr. Abhishek Sood vice Mr. Ramakant Sharma, counsel for defendants No. 3 and 4.
OMP No. 128 of 2011 and CS No. 113 of 2009.
This is an application for decreeing the suit in terms of compromise. It has been stated that plaintiff No. 1 is the general power of attorney holder of plaintiffs No. 2 and 3 and is present in the court and has been duly identified by his counsel. It has also been stated that defendant No. 2 is the general power of attorney holder of defendant No. 1 and is also present in the court and has been duly identified by his counsel. The defendants No. 3 and 4 are also present in the court and identified by Mr. Abhishek Sood, Advocate vice Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate.
It has been stated by learned counsel for the parties that parties have amicably settled the dispute outside the court and have also prepared the application. Let the statements of plaintiff No. 1, defendants No. 2, 3 and 4 be recorded.
Statements of plaintiff No. 1, defendants No. 2, 3 and 4 have been recorded. The parties have amicably settled the dispute and have prepared compromise/ application under O. 23, Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC and have prayed through their counsel for decreeing the suit in terms of the compromise. I have gone through the statements so also the application under O. 23 Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC. There is no impediment in decreeing the suit in
terms of compromise. The compromise appears to be lawful. Accordingly, the suit is decreed in terms of compromise/ application under O. 23, Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC. The compromise/ application alongwith affidavits of plaintiff No. 1, defendants No. 2, 3, 4 shall form part of the decree. The court fee be refunded to the plaintiffs in accordance with law. The parties shall bear their own
costs.
May 2, 2011. (Hem)
( Kuldip Singh ), Judge.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the suit be decreed in terms of the settled compromise application.
Whether the application under Order 23 Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC satisfies legal requirements.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Not citedReferred
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Plaintiffs
Defendants
Kuldip Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
