IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SA No.115 of 2002 Sadhu Saran Rai, Son of Late Rameshwar Rai, R/o Village- Nawada, P.S.-Phulwari ,Post office-Mobarkpur, District- Patna, at present R/o Janta Dairy, Jai Ram Bazar, Khagaul, District- Patna.--------------------------Defendant/Appellant/Appellant Versus 1.Dwarika Prasad @ Yadav. 2.Amar Prasad. Both Sons of late Ramayan Prasad. 3.Sumitra Devi, D/o of Late Ramayan Prasad. 4.(a)Vikash Kumar. (b)Sonu Kumar. Both Sons of Late Birendra Kumar. (c) Jotiya Kumari, D/o Late Birendra Kumar. 5.Urmila Devi, Daughter of Late Ramayan Prasad. All Residents of Bari Khagaul, P.S.- Khagaul, District- Patna. At present resident of Ratu Road, Ranchi, P.S. and District- Ranchi.—Plaintiffs/Respondents /Respondents. 6.Shyam Nandan Rai, Son of Parmeshwar Bhagat, R/o Phulia Tola, P.S- Phulwari, District-Patna. ------------------------------Defendant IInd Set/Respondents. ----------- 18. 11.08.2011 I.A.No. 5974 of 2009. This Interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of respondent no.2, Dwarika Prasad @ Yadav, who has also been allowed to act as the next friend of the 2 minor respondent nos.5(a),5(b) and 5(c) praying therein to permit him to enter into a compromise in this appeal on behalf of the minor respondents. It has been stated in the petition that the compromise is in the interest of aforesaid minors. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has no objection to the prayer. In this view of the matter, the Interlocutory application is allowed respondent no.2, Dwarika Prasad @ Yadav is permitted to enter into a compromise in this appeal as the next friend of minor respondent nos. 5(a),5(b) and 5(c) on their behalf. I.A.No. 5972 of 2009. This is a compromise petition filed by the appellant and respondents in this appeal praying to allow the compromise petition with a direction to prepare a decree in terms of this compromise. Mr. Ranjan Kumar Dubey, Advocate on the instruction of Mr. Umesh Kumar Dubey, Advocate appears on behalf of the appellants in support of the compromise petition. The respondents are represented by Mr. Shakti Suman Kumar, Advocate. Both the learned counsels have supported the compromise. 3 In view of the abovesaid facts the Interlocutory application is allowed, the compromise petition is accepted and this appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise. Let the compromise petition be the part of the decree. Nitesh ( V. Nath, J.)