The High Court of Punjab and Haryana accepted a compromise agreement between the appellant and respondent, modifying the previous decreed amount to Rs.15,000/- and releasing the bank guarantee.
Judgments and decrees modified; suit decreed for Rs.15,000/- lump sum; bank guarantee released; parties bear 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.
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
CM No.417-C of 2008 and R.S.A. No.2209 of 1993
.....
Date of decision:5.2.2008
Gurcharan Singh
.....Applicant-Appellant
v.
.....Respondent
Present: Mr. H.S. Gill, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vivek Goyal, Advocate for the applicant-appellant.
Mr. S.K. Singla, Advocate for the respondent.
S.S. Saron, J. (Oral)
The plaintiff-respondent Teja Singh filed a suit seeking possession by specific performance of agreement dated 3.6.1986 regarding mortgage of land measuring 8 Kanals as detailed in the plaint situated in the area of Village Saidoke. The suit was dismissed by the learned Additional Senior Sub Judge, Moga vide his judgment and decree dated 26.7.1991. In appeal the learned District Judge, Faridkot vide his judgment and decree dated 29.4.1993 partly accepted the appeal and the plaintiff's suit was decreed through out for a sum of Rs.16,320/- i.e. Rs.12,000/- as principal amount and Rs.4,320/- as interest calculated @ 1% per mensem with effect from the date of agreement till the date of suit. Besides, interest pendente lite from the date of suit till the date of decree @ 9% per annum and future interest @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till realization of the same
CM No.417-C/2008 and R.S.A. No.2209 of 1993
[2]
on the sum of Rs.12,000/-. The defendant aggrieved against the decree of the learned District Judge, Faridkot has filed the present RSA which was admitted on 28.2.1994. On 2.1.1995 execution of the judgment and decree dated 29.4.1993 was stayed subject to the appellant's giving bank guarantee of the decretal amount before the executing Court.
During the pendency of the appeal, CM No.417-C of 2008 has been filed for disposing of the appeal and the suit in terms of the compromise. The appellant Gurcharan Singh is present in Court and is identified by his counsel Shri Vivek Goyal, Advocate. Baldev Singh son and power of attorney of Teja Singh-respondent is also present in Court and is identified by his counsel Shri S.K. Singla, Advocate. A photostat copy of the power of attorney executed by Teja Singh in favour of Baldev Singh, his son has been placed on record.
During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties submitted that the compromise attached with CM No.417-C of 2008 as Annexure-A.1 contains certain errors. Therefore, another compromise deed signed by Gurcharan Singh-appellant and Baldev Singh, son and power of attorney holder of Teja Singh-respondent has been filed in Court today. In terms of the compromise, it has been agreed that the appellant Gurcharan Singh will pay Rs.15,000/- in cash or through valid bank draft or cheque and that the claim of respondent against the appellant vide Civil Suit No.293-1 of 1.6.1989 decided by the then Additional Senior Sub Judge, Moga on 31.7.1991 and in Civil Appeal No.283 of 30.10.1991 decided by the District Judge, Faridkot on 29.4.1993 shall stand disposed of and the respondent will have no other claim against the appellant. The compromise
CM No.417-C/2008 and R.S.A. No.2209 of 1993
[3]
effected between the parties is taken on record as Mark-'C1'.
Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the suit may be disposed of in terms of the compromise.
Keeping in view the fact that the parties have compromised and which, in the opinion of the Court, is reasonable and bona fide, there is no reason not to accept the same. Accordingly, the judgment and decree of both the Courts below are modified and the suit of the plaintiff is decreed in terms of the compromise to the extent of Rs.15,000/- in lump-sum. The parties shall bear their own costs and neither party shall have any other claim against the other in the context of the agreement dated 3.6.1986. The bank guarantee that was ordered to be furnished in terms of the order dated 12.1.1995 passed by this Court shall be released in favour of the appellant.
February 5, 2008.
(S.S. Saron) Judge
hsp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the suit should be disposed of in terms of the compromise agreement filed by the parties.
Gurcharan Singh
Teja Singh
S.S. Saron
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
