Partly allowed

Srinivas Kabra and 2 Others v. P. Ganga Rao R/O Khairatabad, Hyderabad

Telangana HC11 Oct 2018AS/673/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a compromise application filed in an appeal regarding specific performance, accepting a Memorandum of Settlement where appellants paid the respondent Rs.6,00,000 to withdraw all claims, thereby setting aside the impugned judgment and decree.

What did the court decide?

IA.No.1 of 2018 allowed; Judgment and Decree dated 31-10-2006 in appeal and underlying O.S. set aside subject to terms of compromise.

Srinivas Kabra and 2 Others Vs P. Ganga… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy

¶2

and

¶3

The Hon’ble Sri Justice T.Amarnath Goud

¶4

IA.No.1 of 2018 in/& AS.No.673 of 2006

¶5

Date: 11.10.2018

¶6

Between :

¶7

Srinivas Kabra and 2 others

¶8

…
Appellants
and
P.Ganga Rao
…
Respondent
:
Counsel for the Appellants Mr.TV.Rajeevan
Counsel for the respondent : Mr.C.Hanumantha Rao
The Court made the following:

¶9

CVNR, J & TA, J IA.No.1/2018 in/& AS.No.673/2006 Date: 11.10.2018

¶10

¶11

Common Judgment : (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy)

¶12

The defendants in OS.No.169 of 2003 on the file of the

¶13

V Additional District Judge, (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy District, filed this Appeal assailing the Judgment and Decree, dated 31.10.2006, passed therein by the said Court for specific performance of an agreement of sale.

¶14

The appellants have filed IA.No.1 of 2018 seeking

¶15

permission to compromise the dispute in the Appeal based on the Memorandum of Settlement entered into between the

¶16

parties. In the affidavit, filed in support of this Application, the parties have set out the terms of compromise, which read as under:

¶17

“1. The appellants have paid an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Only) by way of Demand Draft vide bearing No.024235 dated 3-102018 at Axis Bank Kompelly, to the respondent/plaintiff in withdrawal of all his claims and rights over the suit schedule property.

¶18

The respondent/plaintiff is entitled to withdraw the amount deposited by the plaintiff to the suit account and the appellants have agreed to file no objection for receiving the said amount by the respondent/plaintiff.

¶19

The respondent/plaintiff withdraws all his claims over the suit schedule property under the subject

¶20

CVNR, J & TA, J IA.No.1/2018 in/& AS.No.673/2006 Date: 11.10.2018

¶21

¶22

agreement of sale and under the judgment and decree dated 31-10-2006 in O.S.No.169/2003 on the file of the Hon’ble V Additional District Judge Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar.

¶23

The respondent/plaintiff withdraws all his claims over the suit schedule property under the subject agreement of sale and under the judgment and decree dated 31-10-2006 in O.S.No.169/2003 on the file of the Hon’ble V Additional District Judge, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar.

¶24

In view of the aforesaid settlement and compromise the judgment in O.S.No.169/2003 dated 31-10-2006 on the file of the Hon’ble V Additional District Judge R.R.District at L.B.Nagar is not enforceable and not binding on the parties.”

¶25

The learned Counsel for both parties submitted that defendant No.1 died during the pendency of the suit and as defendant No.3 died on 31-03-2018, an undated memo is filed along with the Memorandum of Compromise wherein it is stated that appellant No.2 is the sole legal heir of the deceased defendant No.3 and that he is already on record.

¶26

Both appellant No.2 and the respondent are personally

¶27

present. The respondent informed the Court that he has given up his claim under the Judgment and Decree, dated 31.10.2006, in OS.No.169 of 2003 in terms of the abovementioned compromise.

¶28

CVNR, J & TA, J IA.No.1/2018 in/& AS.No.673/2006 Date: 11.10.2018

¶29

¶30

In the light of the above, IA.No.1 of 2018 is allowed, Judgment and Decree, dated 31-10-2016, in OS.No.169 of 2003, which are the subject matter of the Appeal are set aside subject to the terms of compromise reproduced above and the Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. It is needless to observe that if the respondent files application for refund of the amounts deposited by him, the same shall be ordered by the Court below and the amount shall be refunded to him in terms of Clause 2 of the terms of compromise reproduced

¶31

above.

¶32

___
(C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J)

(T.Amarnath Goud, J)

¶33

Date: 11^th October, 2018 lur

¶34

CVNR, J & TA, J IA.No.1/2018 in/& AS.No.673/2006 Date: 11.10.2018

¶35

Srinivas Kabra and 2 Others v. P. Ganga Rao R/O Khairatabad, Hyderabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srinivas Kabra and 2 Others v. P. Ganga Rao R/O Khairatabad, Hyderabad

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

M/S Pavani Steels, and 3 Others Vs M/S Shiv Steels [Secunderabad] Pvt. Ltd., Secunderabad.

M.A. Qayyaum, Secbad. and 8 Ano. Vs M.A. Majid, Hyd. and 13 Ano.

M/S.Sri Anjani Mines and Minerals Vs M/S. Oremet Minerals and Metals Pvt.Ltd

Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Ltd., Vs M/S. S.V.R. Cables (P) Ltd., and Another

Smt Krishna Pyari Kabra , Kishan Pyari Kabara and 2 Others Vs Goutham Rao R/O Khairatabad, Hyderabad

Nadimpalli Nagendra Madhu Varma Vs Nadimpalli Ranga Jyothi