1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 4273 of 2011 Date of Decision: 28.07.2011 *** Baljit Kaur & Anr. .. Petitioners Vs. Kuljit Singh & Ors. .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioners. ARVIND KUMAR, J. The parties have allegedly compromised the matter. However, by dint of impugned order dated 28.4.2011 passed by the learned trial Court, the said compromise has not been given effect on account of non- compliance of provisions of Order 32 Rule 7 CPC since one of the defendant i.e. petitioner No.2 herein is minor. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, in all fairness, contends that the petitioners as well as their counsel shall now comply with the provisions of Order 32 Rule 7 CPC, besides the other observations made in para No.4 of the impugned order,so that the compromise arrived at between the parties, could be given effect. In this view of the matter, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned trial Court to permit the petitioners to comply with the aforesaid provisions, apart from any other condition which the Courts deem proper and then to pass the orders afresh, so that the compromise arrived at between the parties, is honoured. Keeping in view the circumstances mentioned above, this petition is being disposed of without issuing any notice to the opposite party. If respondents are summoned to contest this litigation, they will have 2 to incur huge expenses to defend this case. However, liberty is granted to the respondents that if they feel dissatisfied with this order, they may move an application to recall the same. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE July 28, 2011 Jiten