1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Civil Application No. 4044/2008 (Mahadeorao Ramchandra Dhote VERSUS Smt. Sunanda Subhash Sajjanwar) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Shri C.S. Kaptan, counsel for the applicants. Shri A.V. Bhide, counsel for the respondent. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 26, 2008. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. For the reasons stated in the civil application, the delay in filing the restoration application is condoned. The civil application is allowed and disposed of. It appears that though the civil application for permission to bring the legal heirs of deceased appellant Mahadeo on record was allowed by this Court, the necessary amendment was not carried out by the appellant. Shri Kaptan, the learned counsel for the appellant, seeks leave to carry out the amendment, forthwith. Leave is granted. The appellant is permitted to carry out the amendment, forthwith. 2 M.C.A. ST. NO. 8666/2008. By this miscellaneous civil application, the applicant seeks restoration of second appeal. I have perused the contents of the civil application and have heard the learned counsel for the parties. For the reasons stated in the civil application, the order dated 10.08.2007 is hereby recalled. The Second Appeal No.113/2007 is restored to file. JUDGE APTE 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Second Appeal No. 113/2007 (Mahadeorao Ramchandra Dhote VERSUS Smt. Sunanda Subhash Sajjanwar) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Shri C.S. Kaptan, counsel for the appellants. Shri A.V. Bhide, counsel for the respondent. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 26, 2008. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the parties have presented an application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the Court, today. The application is taken on record and marked as Exh.'Z'. By this civil application, the applicants prays that the compromise in terms of the application be recorded and a decree be passed in terms thereof. The respondent is the original plaintiff. A suit for grant of a decree for specific performance of contract was passed in favour of the respondent and the defendant/appellant was directed to execute the sale-deed of the suit property in favour of the respondent. The 4 appellant has filed the second appeal challenging the decree for specific performance of contract, granted in favour of the respondent. It is submitted on behalf of the parties that the respondent has agreed to accept a particular sum so as to give up her claim for specific performance of contract. The appellant Nos.1(1), 1(2) and 1(4) are personally present in the Court today, so also, the respondent is also personally present in the Court today. The application for recording of compromise is signed by the appellant Nos.1(1), 1(2) and 1(4). The application is also signed by the sole respondent. So also, the counsel for the appellants and the respondent have also signed the application dated 26.09.2008 for recording the compromise. I have made the queries to the parties and I am satisfied that the parties are ad idem over the terms mentioned in the compromise. The terms also appear to be just and reasonable as the respondent has given up the claim for specific performance of contract in lieu of an amount of Rs.1,13,000/- (Rupees One Lac Thirteen Thousand only). It appears from the application and it is also informed by the counsel for the parties that the amount of Rs.1,13,000/- (Rupees One Lac Thirteen Thousand only) has 5 been received by the respondent towards full and final settlement of the claim. The appellants have stated before this Court that they would withdraw the Criminal Complaint Case No.76/2008 filed by them against the respondent and pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Yavatmal, unconditionally. It further appears that the respondent had deposited the balance amount of Rs.45,000/- towards the execution of the sale-deed before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Yavatmal by C.C.D. No.316, dated 13.04.2002. Since the matter is compromised between the parties and a decree is being drawn in terms of the compromise, the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Yavatmal is directed to refund the amount of Rs.45,000/- (Rupees Forty Five Thousand only) to the respondent along with the interest, in case the same was deposited in the fixed deposit account. The second appeal is disposed of on the basis of compromise. A decree be drawn in terms of the compromise. JUDGE APTE