RSA No.4632 of 2010 (O & M) - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.4632 of 2010 (O & M) Date of Decision: 18.03.2011 Guddi Devi and another ……Appellants Versus Ginna Devi …...Respondent Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL. Present: Mr. Madan Gopal Gupta, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Sumeet Mahajan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vaibhav Sehgal, Advocate for the respondent. Appellant No.1 (who is also mother and next friend of minor appellant No.2) with her brother Manphool and respondent with her daughter Kamla Devi also in person. L.N. MITTAL, J (ORAL) Parties have effected amicable settlement. Joint statement regarding settlement has been recorded separately and is reproduced hereunder:- “Stated that with the intervention of the Court, parties have entered into amicable settlement. According to compromise, respondent-Ginna Devi shall be absolute owner in possession of the following 18 kanals land in all out of the suit land i.e. 7 kanals 6 marlas land of killa No.123//9 and adjoining thereto, 1 kanal 4 marlas land of killa No.123//12/1 (northern part thereof) out of 3 kanals 16 marlas land of the said killa, 5 kanals land of killa NO.124//8/2 and adjoining thereto, 4 kanals 10 marlas land of killa No.124//13 (northern part of the said killa) out of 8 kanals thereof and respondent shall have no concern whatsoever with the remaining suit land RSA No.4632 of 2010 (O & M) - 2 - of which appellants shall be absolute owner in possession. The appeal be disposed of accordingly. Aforesaid compromise is for the benefit of minor appellant No.2 because out of total suit land measuring 112 kanals 17 marlas, land measuring 18 kanals only is being given to respondent Ginna Devi who is mother of Rattan Singh since deceased. Appellants are widow and minor daughter of the said Rattan Singh. Respondent is being given lesser share than her share by natural inheritance and, therefore, the compromise is for the benefit of minor appellant No.2. Separate affidavit of next friend of minor appellant No.1 and certificate of counsel for the appellants that the compromise is for the benefit of minor appellant No.2 are also being filed. The appeal be disposed of in terms of the above compromise.” The said statement has also been singed by Manphool brother of appellant No.1 and Kamla Devi daughter of respondent. I am satisfied that the compromise is for the benefit of minor appellant No.2, for the reasons recorded in the aforesaid statement, which is supported by affidavit of appellant No.1 and certificate of counsel for the appellants to this effect. Accordingly, necessary permission for effecting compromise on behalf of minor appellant No.2 is granted. 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. (L. N. MITTAL) JUDGE 18.03.2011. A.kaundal