1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO.3721 OF 2008. 1) Navnitkaur w/o Manjitsingh Dumda and two others. - APPELLANTS VERSUS Bhagwan s/o Kaduba Dhayade - RESPONDENT ***** Mr.SP Deshmukh,Advocate for Appellant; Mr.MK Deshpande,Advocate for Respondent. ----- WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.3808 OF 2008. Bhagwan s/o Kaduba Dhayade - APPELLANT VERSUS 1)Navnitkaur w/o Manjitsingh Dumda and two others. -RESPONDENTS **** Mr.MK Deshpande, Adv. for appellant; Mr.SP Deshmukh, Adv. for Respondents. _________ CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL,J. DATE : 21st DECEMBER,2010. PER COURT: 1) Mr.Deshmukh has tendered No Objection of 2 Mr. PM Yelnoorkar, Adv. in First Appeal No. 3721/2008 by filing his power. 2) CA St.No.37969/2010 is moved, seeking leave to enter into settlement/compromise on behalf of Minor Neha @ Harpreet d/o Manjitsingh Dumda in First Appeal No.3721/2008 and First Appeal No.3808/2008. Mr.MK Deshpande, for the respondent in First Appeal No.3721/2008 and for appellant in later appeal being First Appeal No. 3808/2008, waives service for the applicant. Office to register the Civil Application. 3) Heard Mr.Deshmukh in the application. He supports the application by his certificate that the settlement/compromise, in his opinion, looking at the circumstances, educational needs and pecuniary condition coupled with expenses, in which Navnitkaur wd/o Manjitsing Dumada; Sumeet @ Manpreeetsingh s/o Manjitsingh Dumda and minor Neha @ Harpreet d/o Manjitsingh Dumda, are living, is proposed for the benefit of Neha @ Harpreetkau d/o Manjitsing Dumda. The Certificate is accepted. 4) Affidavits are tendered by Smt. Navnitkaur w/ Manjitsingh Dumda, mother of minor Neha @ Harpreet d/o Manjitsingh Dumda, in both the First Appeals. The affiant informs that 3 amicable settlement arrived at with an object to put quietus to the litigation; and based on such settlement/compromise, the affiant would be receiving an amount of Rs.11,50,000/- (Rupees eleven lakhs and fifty thousand). The affiant has no source of earning. Sumeet and Neha are taking education, which require expenses. The affiant is not in a position to meet such expenses. The settlement arrived at is, in the interest and benefit of the minor. The amount, that would be received, would be invested in fixed deposit for a period of two years until minor Neha @ Harpreet d/o Manjitsingh Dumda attains macjority. 5) In the light of the contents of the application, affidavits referred above and certificate from Mr. SP Deshmukh, Advocate, I have no hesitation to accept that the settlement arrived at on behalf of and for the benefit of minor Neha @ Harpreet is essential in good faith, without any impediment to the legal rights and for her future benefits. The financial crunch that the family has faced, has been demonstrated in the affidavits of her mother – Navnitkaur w/o Manjitsingh Dumda. The settlement would resolve the controversy as the suit for specific performance of contract was moved by Bhagwan s/o Kaduba Dhayade (original plaintiff), party in the proceedings. Since the suit shop was allegedly 4 agreed to be sold and in possession of said Bhagwan Dhayade, the settlement for an amount of Rs.11,50,000/- is in conformity with the prevailing market rate in the vicinity, as informed by Mr. SP Deshmukh; Mr.MK Deshpande and mother of the minor. 6) In the above situation, the application, seeking permission of the Court to allow Navnitkaur w/o Manjitsingh Dumda to enter into a compromise on behalf of minor Neha @ Harpreet, is permitted. CA allowed as above. 7) Perused the settlement/compromise terms. The parties are identified by respective Counsel. The parties confirm that the settlement/compromise bear their signatures, the contents were explained to them by their counsel. 8) Pursuant to the settlement, an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakhs) would be deposited in the name and for the benefit of minor Neha @ Harpreet d/o Manjitsingh Dumda for a period of two years or till she attains majority. Bank receipt in this regard would be produced before this Court on or before 7th January, 2011. The remaining consideration, barring Rs.4,00,000/-, as referred in paragraph 9 of Terms of Compromise is received by way of a 5 Demand Draft, numbers of which are recorded at page 8 of the terms of compromise. The consent terms recorded. 9) In the light of the terms of compromise, both the appeals are disposed of. Special Civil Suit No.376/2006 (decided on 27.6.2008) is disposed of in the light of above settlement. Decree accordingly. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/