Allowed a civil revision petition setting aside a trial court order that dismissed a petition to produce a compromise agreement. Directed the trial court to receive the document as evidence and decide the suit on merits.
Impugned order set aside; Trial court directed to receive the agreement document during evidence and pass judgment on merits.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO CIVIL REIVISION PETITION No.3946 OF 2018
ORDER:
This civil revision petition is filed by the petitioners/defendants aggrieved by the order dated 26.04.2018 in I.A.No.175 of 2018 in O.S.No.24 of 2016 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Miryalaguda, whereunder the trial court dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner to receive the agreement dated 17.10.2017 styled as “Oppanda Patram” said to be executed between the plaintiff and defendant.
2
but contended that the petitioners promised to pay the balance amount and have not paid the same and therefore, he did not withdraw the suit. Be that it may, the trial court dismissed the petition on the ground that the compromise was entered into after filing of the suit and therefore, it has no relevancy. It is constrained to note the observation of the trial court is not correct in the light of the admission made by the respondent/plaintiff in its counter.
3
petitioners/defendants subject to law of stamp duty and registration and then consider the effect of the document in the issues involved in the suit and pass the judgement on merits.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
___________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J
07.09.2018 SS
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a compromise agreement entered into during the pendency of a suit is relevant to decide issues involved in the suit.
Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the petition to receive an 'Oppanda Patram' agreement on the ground that it was executed after the filing of the suit.
Whether material合同履行 within a compromise agreement executed during suit pendency should be admitted by the trial court.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner/Defendant
Respondent/Plaintiff
U.Durga Prasad Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
