Allowed

Tokachichu Satyanarayna Raju v. Md. Khaja Mohiuffin [died]

Telangana HC27 Nov 2013SA/1608/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court recorded a compromise filed by the appellants and most respondents on behalf of which they appeared. After verifying the vakalat for two absent respondents, the court allowed the second appeal by recording the compromise terms without awarding costs.

What did the court decide?

SAMP No. 2779 of 2013 allowed; Second Appeal No. 1608 of 2004 disposed; no costs awarded.

Tokachichu Satyanarayna Raju Vs Md. Khaja… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR

¶2

S.A.M.P. No.2779 of 2013 and Second Appeal No. 1608 of 2004

¶3

Judgment:

¶4

This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 30.01.2004 passed in A.S. No. 44 of 1998 by the V Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.IV), Khammam, whereby and whereunder the judgment and decree dated 31.03.1998 passed in O.S. No.15 of 1986 by the Senior Civil Judge, Khammam, is set aside.

¶5

SAMP No.2779 of 2013 is filed by both the parties stating that they have settled the matter out of the Court and praying to record the compromise and dispose of the second appeal in terms of the compromise.

¶6

This Court, on 11.11.2013, passed the following order.

¶7

“The appellants and their counsel Sri S. Srinivas Reddy are present. The respondents 6 to 28 and their counsel Sri Hanumantha Rao are present. The respective counsel have identified the parties present before the Court and they have also produced Xerox copies of photo identity cards.

¶8

It is represented that respondent No.4 namely Md. Masluddin is sick and respondent No.5 namely Md. Muzafaruddin is out of country.

¶9

The appellants and respondents 6 to 28 present before the Court have agreed that they have settled the matter out of the Court. The contents of the memorandum of compromise have been read over and explained to them in Telugu and Urdu and they stated that the terms of the memorandum of compromise are correct. It also appears that the parties have voluntarily settled the dispute on their free will.

¶10

In the circumstances, as far as the parties present before this Court are concerned, the compromise is recorded. As far as the respondents 4 and 5 is

¶11

concerned, their presence is required. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that respondents 4 and 5 would execute special vakalat authorizing their counsel to represent them before the Court.

¶12

Post on 27.11.2013 for recording compromise in respect of respondents 4 and 5, who are not present before this Court. The parties present before this Court today need not be present on 27.11.2013.”

¶13

Today, when the matter is called, special vakalat is filed by Sri V. Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 4 and 5. Since special vakalat has been filed on behalf of respondents 4 and 5 and they are being represented by Sri V. Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel, the compromise is recorded with regard to those respondents also.

¶14

In view of the same, SAMP No.2779 of 2013 is allowed and the terms of memorandum of compromise are recorded. The Second Appeal No.1608 of 2004 is, accordingly, disposed of in terms of the compromise. However, in the circumstances, no costs.

¶15

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this second appeal shall stand closed.

¶16

______________________ B. CHANDRA KUMAR, J.

¶17

Date: 27.11.2013 Nsr

Tokachichu Satyanarayna Raju v. Md. Khaja Mohiuffin [died]

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tokachichu Satyanarayna Raju v. Md. Khaja Mohiuffin [died]

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Dandu Uppalamma

Md. Farooq Khan, Vs S.Srinivas Rao

Shaik Mahboob Basha, Vs Medarmitla Tirupathi Reddy

United India Insurance Company Limited, Vs Lakkasani Shoba Rani

Beeda Ravi Chandra Vs Muthyala Bala Rami Reddy

Thati Masthanaiah Vs Pelluru Udhaya Bhaskar,Babu