IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL A.O. No. 161 of 2009 Man Singh Chaudhary. … Appellant. Versus Smt. Ishrat W/O Late Jamshed and others. … Respondents. Mr. B.D.Pande Advocate, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. Pan Singh Bisht, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Narendra Bali, Advocate, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 5. Date April 05, 2011. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. (Delay Condonation Application No. 3910 of 2009) Learned counsel for the appellant files supplementary affidavit. The same is taken on record. Ground sufficient to condone the delay. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned. (Delay condonation application stands disposed of.) Admit the appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant has made a statement at the Bar that the parties had entered into a compromise and an amount of Rs. 3,90,000/- has already been paid to the claimants during the pendency of execution proceedings. As such, the appeal may be disposed of in terms of the compromise. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a certified copy of the compromise and order dated 7-1-2011 passed in the execution case as Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection, if the amount of statutory deposit made by the appellant is refunded to the appellant. In view of the compromise entered into between the parties in execution proceeding, the appeal is disposed of in terms of compromise award. The Registry is directed to refund the amount of statutory deposit made by the appellant in this appeal. (B.S.Verma, J.) RCP