IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Civil Suit No. 71 of 2010. Date of decision: September 1, 2010. Dr. Jagan Nath Barowalia ….. Plaintiff. Vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi …. Defendant. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the plaintiff : Mr. Ajay Mohan Goel, Advocate. For the defendants : Mr. G.C.Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pawan Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for the defendant. Mr. J.R.Thakur, Advocate, as Conciliator. The plaintiff has filed Civil Suit No. 102-1 of 2008 for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant in the court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Court No.2, Shimla. It is not necessary to give details of the plaint and defence of defendant in view of settlement of dispute between the parties and their request to dispose of the suit in terms of the compromise. 2. In fact LPA No. 87 of 2010 has been filed by the plaintiff against many respondents, in which defendant is respondent No.4. Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… The main dispute in LPA No. 87 of 2010 is between the plaintiff and defendant. The Civil Suit No. 102-1 of 2008 was withdrawn to this court vide order dated 30.8.2010 in LPA No. 87 of 2010 and thereafter said suit has been registered and renumbered in this court as Civil Suit No. 71 of 2010. 3. The plaintiff is present in person so also Sh. Hari Chand Gupta General Power of attorney of defendant. The parties have settled the dispute and they have filed a joint application dated 30.8.2010 under Order 23, Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC, which is signed by plaintiff, Sh. Hari Chand Gupta GPA of defendant and their respective counsel. The application is also supported by affidavits of plaintiff and Sh. Hari Chand Gupta. The parties have also annexed settlement/ compromise dated 30.8.2010 alongwith the application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC. The settlement dated 30.8.2010 is also signed by plaintiff and Sh. Hari Chand Gupta and two witnesses. The plaintiff and Sh. Hari Chand Gupta have admitted the correctness of the contents of application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC, they have admitted their signatures on the application as well as signatures of their counsel on the application. 4. The plaintiff and Sh. Hari Chand Gupta have also admitted the settlement dated 30.8.2010 annexed with the application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC and have stated that both of them have signed the settlement in token of its correctness. They have also stated that the settlement is signed by two witnesses. 5. The learned counsel for the parties have stated that parties have settled the dispute by way of the settlement dated …3… 30.8.2010. They have jointly stated that the suit may be decreed in terms of settlement dated 30.8.2010. We have gone though the application and settlement dated 30.8.2010. We are satisfied that parties have lawfully compromised the suit. In these circumstances, the suit is decreed in terms of settlement dated 30.8.2010. The settlement dated 30.8.2010 alongwith tatima annexed with the settlement dated 30.8.2010 shall form part of the decree. The parties shall bear their own costs. The decree sheet be drawn accordingly. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. September 1, 2010. (Justice Kuldip Singh), (Hem) Judge.