Allowed

Mohammed Abdul Hafeez (died) v. Mohammed Abdul Ghani, (Died) per LRs R-10 to 13

Telangana HC27 Sept 2016CCCA/166/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court recorded a compromise filed by the Appellant against Respondents 6 to 8, who were absent. The appeal was allowed upon recording the compromise, with the specific direction that the compromise would not bind the absent parties, and a civil appeal related to this matter was dismissed. No order as to costs was passed.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is allowed upon recording a compromise. All pending miscellaneous petitions in the appeal are closed. No order as to costs.

Mohammed Abdul Hafeez (died) Vs Mohammed… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA

¶2

C.C.C.A. M.P. No.554 OF 2016 In/And C.C.C.A. No.166 OF 2005

¶3

COMMON JUDGMENT :

¶4

C.C.C.A. M.P. No.554 of 2016 is filed to record compromise in terms of the joint memorandum of compromise between the parties.

¶5

Both the parties except respondent Nos.6 to 8 are present. Their learned counsel, respectively, and the learned Government Pleader for respondent Nos.6 to 8 are also present. They admitted the terms and conditions mentioned in the present petition filed under Order 23 Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC and even made a request to record compromise as per the terms indicated. Certain terms and conditions have been mentioned in the present petition, which are admitted by the parties herein including condition No.4, which relates to either taking flat or taking the amount in lieu of the flat associated with yet another condition. Therefore, compromise is recorded between the parties as per the terms mentioned in the present petition. Ultimately, the parties sought to dismiss the appeal in view of the compromise.

¶6

Hence, C.C.C.A. M.P. No.554 of 2016 is allowed

¶7

recording compromise as per the terms mentioned in this petition. However, the compromise entered into between the parties will not bind respondent Nos.6 to 8.

¶8

¶9

It is stated that the house in the premises was even vacated by the school authorities, but however, there is no finality in regard to vacation, as the learned Government Pleader, still, has to ascertain as to vacation by the school from the premises.

¶10

In view of ordering C.C.C.A. M.P. No.554 of 2016, by recording compromise between the parties, C.C.C.A. No.166 of 2005 stands dismissed. The compromise petition along with terms and conditions of compromise shall form part of the record. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶11

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any

¶12

pending in the instant appeal, stand closed.

¶13

___________________________ A. SHANKAR NARAYANA, J

¶14

27^th September, 2016 Note: Issue CC in three days B/O siva

Mohammed Abdul Hafeez (died) v. Mohammed Abdul Ghani, (Died) per LRs R-10 to 13

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Abdul Hafeez (died) v. Mohammed Abdul Ghani, (Died) per LRs R-10 to 13

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranghavajhala Praveen Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Chintala Venkata Rama Subrahmanya Raju Vs Akula Ramarao

The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Vs Banoth Shantha

Gyaneshwar Morey, Vs Rajendra Prasad Tadav

Kammari Shankar Vs Sri Vanjari Sai Ramulu

Purushotham G. Mehta Vs N. Mruthyunjay