Regular Second Appeal No.3840 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.3840 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: 29 th MARCH, 2011 Jit Singh .... Appellant Versus Baljit Kaur .... Respondent CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Arihant Jain, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. C. L. Premi, Advocate Ms. Naiya Gill, Advocate for the respondent. Parties also in person. * * * * L.N. MITTAL, J. (ORAL) Appellant and respondent, who are brother and sister, have arrived at amicable settlement in the instant second appeal, with intervention of the Court. Joint statement of parties regarding compromise has been recorded separately and is reproduced hereunder: “Statement of Jit Singh, Appellant and Baljit Kaur respondent on SA. Stated that with the intervention of the court, we have effected compromise. Appellant states that he has already deposited Rs.80,000/- in the trial court. In view of the compromise, respondent shall withdraw the said amount unconditionally. In addition to it, the appellant shall pay Rs.30,000/- more to the respondent on or before 25.07.2011, either directly or by deposit in the trial court, in full and final satisfaction of the claim of the respondent. On such payment, the decrees Regular Second Appeal No.3840 of 2009 -2- passed by the courts below shall be deemed to have been satisfied. However, in case the appellant fails to pay the amount of Rs.30,000/- within the stipulated period, the instant second appeal shall be deemed to have been dismissed. In view of the compromise effected by the parties, court fee paid for the instant second appeal be refunded to the appellant. The appeal be disposed of in the above terms.” The case has thus been lawfully compromised. In view of compromise, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the above statement, which shall also form part of the decree sheet. Since the case has been amicably settled within the meaning of Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, court fee paid for the instant second appeal is ordered to be refunded to the appellant. (L. N. MITTAL) JUDGE 29th March, 2011 'raj'