CM Nos.13925-C-2009 and -1- CM No.13926-C-2009 and RSA No.4607 of 2009 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CM Nos.13925-C-2009 and CM No.13926-C-2009 and RSA No.4607 of 2009 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 15.12.2009 **** Mohd. Munir and others . . . . Appellants VS. Janni and others . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN **** Present: Mr.Arihant Jain, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.Jagdev Singh, Advocate for the respondents. **** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN J. (ORAL) CM Nos.13925-C-2009 This is an application under Order 22 Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) for impleading the Legal Representatives of Majidan (respondent No.5). The application is supported by an affidavit of Mohd. Munir (appellant). Notice in the application. At this stage, Mr.Jagdev Singh, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of Mohd. Ramjan @ Jana and Ahmed Din, both sons of Majidan and filed his power of attorney. It is mentioned in the application that there is no other Legal Representative of Majidan except Mohd. Ramjan @ Jana and Ahmed Din. CM Nos.13925-C-2009 and -2- CM No.13926-C-2009 and RSA No.4607 of 2009 (O&M) After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the aforesaid application is allowed. Mohd. Ramjan @ Jana and Ahmed Din sons of Majidan are impleaded as Legal Representatives in place of respondent No.5 (Majidan). CM No.13926-C-2009 Allowed as prayed for. Amended memo of parties is taken on record. RSA No.4607 of 2009 Mst. Fatma filed a suit for declaration to the effect that she is the owner in joint possession to the extent of ½ share of the land measuring 21 Bighas 5 Biswas, situated at Vilalge Quila Rehmatgarh, as per Jamabandi for the year 1992-93 and ¼ share out of land measuring 37 Bighas 14 Biswas, situated as village Mehmoodabad, as per Jamabandi for the year 1989-90. The said suit was dismissed by the learned Trial Court vide its judgment and decree dated 19.12.2003. Before the First Appeal could have been filed, Mst. Fatma had expired. Civil Appeal No. 023 of 28.1.2004 was filed by her Legal Representatives, namely, Janni, Hajjo @ Hajran, Ramzanan dnd Mazidan and her son Suleman. The said appeal was decreed and it was ordered as under: - “It is ordered that the instant appeal has merit and the same is allowed with costs and pass a declaratory decree to the effect that the appellant/plaintiff is a co-owner to the extent of ½ share of land measuring 21 Bighas 5 Biswas, fully described in the heading of the plaint, situated within the revenue estate of Village, Qila Rehmagarh, Malerkotla and to the extent of 1/6th share of land CM Nos.13925-C-2009 and -3- CM No.13926-C-2009 and RSA No.4607 of 2009 (O&M) measuring 37 Bighas 14 Biswas, fully described in the heading of the plaint, situated at Village, Mehmoodabad, Tehsil, Malerkotla, and a decree for joint possession to the extent of her share as already mentioned above in the property in question, in favour of the appellant/plaintiff and against the respondents/defendants.” Aggrieved against the judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court, the defendants have come up in a Second Appeal. During the pendency of this appeal, a written compromise has been effected between the parties on 27.11.2009, which is signed by Janni, Ramjanna, Hajo @ Hajran, Suleman and both the sons of Mazidan, namely, Ahmed Din and Mohd. Munir. The Compromise has also been singed by one Bashir Khan as an Attorney of Janni, Hajo @ Hajran, Ramjanna and Suleman. Copy of the compromise and a duly attested General Power of Attorney by Mr.Jagdev Singh, Advocate is also placed on record, which is marked as Mark ‘A’ . In this General Power of Attorney all the aforesaid persons have given Power to Bashir Khan to compromise the matter. The terms and conditions of the compromise are as under: - “The legal heirs of deceased Fatma Party No.1 agreed that Party No.2 Mohd. Munir etc. to be owners in possession of suit land and further agreed that in the suit land deceased Fatma Plaintiffs have no share or concern. It is further agreed that all the mutation, which were sanctioned in favour of Party No.2 are true and correct and the suit of Smt. Fatma Plaintiff is liable to be dismissed and the parties admitted the order in Suit No.183 Rajua 19.4.2005 decided on 19.12.2003 by Rakesh Kumar, PCS, Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Malerkotla. CM Nos.13925-C-2009 and -4- CM No.13926-C-2009 and RSA No.4607 of 2009 (O&M) The Party No.2 admitted to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rs. 10 lacs) as per compromise to Smt. Janni daughter of Fatma (wife of Gafoor), resident of Idgah Road, Malerkotla, Smt. Hajo alias Hajran, daughter of Fatma (wife of Mohd. Din), resident of Jamalpura, Malerkotla, Smt. Ramjanna, daughter of Fatma (wife of Ibrahim) resident of 786 Chowk, Malerkotla, Suleman son of Fatma, resident of Qila Rehmatgarh, Tehsil, Malerkotla, (5) Mohd. Ramzan alias Jana, Ahmed Din sons of Late Smt. Majidan, Widow of Sadiq son of Dula residents of Qila Rehmatgarh, Tehsil, Malerkotla, Distt.Sangrur, legal heirs of deceased Fatma, Party No.1. Out of the above amount sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs.Two Lacs) has already been paid by the Party No.2 in the presence of witnesses and the same was received by the Party No.1 legal heirs of deceased Smt.Fatma. The respondents Party No.1 will also give their statement in the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh for admitting the abovesaid compromise and they will also try to continue the order of Hon'ble Sh.Rakesh Kumar, Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Malerkotla dated 19.12.2003. The party No.2 will be bound to pay a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- (Rs.Eight Lacs) as remaining amount to the Party No.1 in High Court of Punjab & Haryana, Chandigarh. The possession already is in the hands of Party No.2 Mohd.Munir and further Party No.2 will be owner in possession of suit land. The party No.1 legal heirs of Smt.Fatma will have no concern with the suit land and Party No.1 will not file further any suit or execution regarding order dated 1.9.2009 regarding the aforesaid land against Party No.2 Mohd.Munir. We Party No.2 legal heirs of Smt.Fatma took all his rights from the suit land and deliver in favour of Party No.2. The Party No.1 will be further bound to sanction the mutation of the suit land in CM Nos.13925-C-2009 and -5- CM No.13926-C-2009 and RSA No.4607 of 2009 (O&M) favour of Party No.2. Smt.Majidan wife of Mohd.Sadiq has been died and her legal heirs Mohd.Ramjan alias Jana and Ahmed Din sons of Smt.Majidan are from the Party No.1. If the Party No.1 did not record their statement in the Hon'ble High Court then Party No.1 will be bound to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs.Two lacs) to the Party No.2. If the Party No.1 did not pay the same to the Party No.2 then the Party No.2 will have right to receive the amount with interest through court. The Party No.2 will have right to proceed legal action in the Hon'ble Court against the Party No.1 if the Party No.1 did not fulfill their part. That in the Party No.1, Jani, Hajo alias Hajran, Ramjannan, Suleman, legal heirs of Fatma has given their General Power of Attorney, vide Deed No.120 dated 29.10.2009 in favour of Bashir Khan son of Mangu Khan, resident of Village, Abbaspura, Tehsil Malerkotla. Therefore, Bashir Khan has right to put his signatures on the compromise. The Parties will be bound to accept appeal from High Court to admit the order in Civil Judge Sahib, Malerkotla. The parties further agreed to complete the compromise within one month. The parties will be bound with the compromise. So, the words of the compromise has been reduced into writing after admitting its contents to be true and correct. Bashir Khan, Mohd. Ramzan and Ahmed Din are present in Court, who have been identified by their Advocate Mr.Jagdev Singh. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that a sum of Rs.2 lacs has already been paid to respondents No.1 to 5. The CM Nos.13925-C-2009 and -6- CM No.13926-C-2009 and RSA No.4607 of 2009 (O&M) remaining amount of Rs.8 lacs is handed over to Mr.Jagdev Singh, Advocate for the respondents, in the Court today. As the matter has been compromised between the parties and in view thereof the plaintiffs have relinquished their right in the land in question, which has been decreed in favour of their predecessor-in-interest, the present appeal is allowed, judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court is set aside and that of the trial Court is restored. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) DECEMBER 15, 2009 JUDGE vivek