THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH A.S. C.M.P.NO:2240 OF 2009 & APPEAL SUIT NO:1444 OF 2003 & Tr.A.S.NO: 60 OF 2005 Dated: 17.12.2009 Between: Deva Upendar ..Appellant And 1. Deva Krishana Murty and others. .. Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH A.S. C.M.P.NO:2240 OF 2009 & APPEAL SUIT NO:1444 OF 2003 & Tr.A.S.NO: 60 OF 2005 COMMON JUDGMENT: Both the above appeals are filed by the appellant aggrieved by the common judgment and decree dated 30.1.2003 on the file of the 1st Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal. The appellant is the defendant and the respondents are the plaintiffs before the trial Court. The respondents filed O.S.153 of 2000 seeking to pass a preliminary decree partitioning the suit schedule property into two halves among the plaintiffs and defendant. By judgment and decree dated 30.1.2003, the learned trial Court decreed the suit with costs to partition the suit schedule property bearing H.No:9-1-20 into two shares while dismissing the counter claim of the defendant seeking to partition the schedule property bearing H.No:9-1-19 into two shares, with costs. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant filed A.S.1444 of 2003 before this Court and A.S.14 of 2004 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Warangal. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the said A.S.14 of 2004 has subsequently been transferred from the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Warangal to that of this Court and renumbered as Tr.A.S.No:60 of 2005. At this stage, both the learned counsel submitted that the above appeals arose out of one and the same decree and judgment of the trial Court and therefore, both the appeals may be disposed of by a common judgment. During the pendency of the appeals, both the parties have entered into a compromise and filed the present A.S.C.M.P.2240 of 2009 under order 23 Rule 3 read with section 151 C.P.C seeking to pass a final decree in terms of the memorandum of compromise by recording the terms of the compromise as mentioned in the memorandum of compromise filed along with the present A.S. C.M.P. Both the parties to the lis are present before the Court and they have been identified by their respective counsel. The learned counsel for the appellant and SriVasantha Lakshmi Bavaraju, the learned counsel representing the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the matter was compromised between the parties and therefore, the same has been reduced into writing and the memorandum of compromise was also filed along with the present A.S.C.M.P. and therefore, both the appeals may be disposed in terms of the compromise. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the counsel on either side, A.S. C.M.P.2240 of 2009 is allowed recording the compromise as arrived at in the memorandum of compromise filed along with the A.S.C.M.P.2240 of 2009. Accordingly, both the appeals are disposed of in terms of the compromise. However, it is made clear that A.S.C.M.P2240 of 2009 and the memorandum of compromise filed along with the same, shall be form part of the record as well as the final decree. _____________________ G.CHANDRAIAH,J 17.12.2009 gurc. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH A.S. C.M.P.NO:2240 OF 2009 & APPEAL SUIT NO:1444 OF 2003 & Tr.A.S.NO: 60 OF 2005 Dated 17th DECEMBER,2009.