IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.3645, 3919 and 3986 of 2001 CRP No.3645 of 2001 Between: V.G.K. Prasad. ... PETITIONER AND The Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District and 9 others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. S. KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondents 3 & 4: MR. V. VENKATARAMANA CRP No.3919 and 3986 of 2001 Between: Gurudeve Siddhpeeth (formerly known as Gurudev Ashram) ... PETITIONER AND V.G.K. Prasad and 7 others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. V. VENKATARAMANA Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MR. S. KRISHNA The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: CRP.No.3645 of 2001 is preferred by the appellant in Appeal No.F2/6783/98 dated 11.06.2001 before the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District. So also respondent Nos.3 and 4 have filed CRP.No.3919 of 2001 against the very same order and CRP.No.3986 of 2001 is directed against the appeal No.F2/1501/1999 dated 11.06.2001. All the petitioners are, therefore, commonly aggrieved by the common order of the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District in both the appeals referred to above. 2. Mr. Prabhakar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in CRP.Nos.3919 and 3986 of 2001 submits and has placed before this Court the additional material papers containing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) recorded between the parties dated 04.02.2008. He also filed copies of orders passed by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District in O.S.No.154 of 1996 dated 11.06.2008 together with memo filed by the plaintiff therein and a copy of the judgment in A.S.No.121 of 2004 dated 30.11.2007 before the V Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District is also placed wherein the injunction in favour of the petitioners in CRP.Nos.3919 and 3986 of 2001 has been granted by the said Court. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner in CRP.No.3645 of 2001 has accepted the right, title, claim and possession of the petitioners in CRP.Nos.3919 and 3986 of 2001 and the same is recorded in the MOU referred to above. In terms of the said memorandum, the learned counsel submits, that the petitioner in CRP.No.3645 of 2001 has agreed to unconditionally withdraw the revision petition and all other connected proceedings and in effect all contest against the petitioners in CRP.Nos.3919 and 3986 of 2001 is withdrawn as per MOU. It is also recorded that the CRP.No.3645 of 2001 shall stand withdrawn and consequently, the title of the petitioners in CRP.Nos.3919 and 3986 of 2001 is accepted by the said petitioner. Therefore, in terms of the said MOU, CRP.No.3645 of 2001 be dismissed and consequently, CRP.Nos.3919 and 3986 of 2001 be allowed inasmuch as the petitioner in CRP.No.3645 of 2001 has withdrawn all contest against the petitioners in CRP.Nos.3919 and 3986 of 2001. 3. Nobody appears for the petitioner in CRP.No.3645 of 2001, though the matter was coming for recording settlement on a number of occasions. Even today also, nobody appears for the petitioner in CRP.No.3645 of 2001. 4. Mr. Prabhakar, learned counsel, therefore, submits that in view of the MOU referred to above, all the parties having implemented the same, as is evident from the orders of the civil Court referred to above, CRP.No.3645 of 2001 be dismissed and the connected CRP.Nos.3919 and 3986 of 2001 be allowed. In view of the above, therefore, CRP.No.3645 of 2001 shall stand dismissed and CRP.Nos.3919 and 3986 of 2001 shall stand allowed and the corresponding appeals before the Joint Collector shall stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J April 7, 2010 DSK