IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD SATURDAY THE THIRTETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO SA.No. 1062 OF 2009 Between: M. Shivaji … Appellant-Defendant No.1 V/s. T. Rama Devi & Anr. … Respondent-Defendant No.2 Counsel for the Appellant: Sri P. Venkat Reddy Counsel for the Respondents: Sri K. Ram Babu The Court made the following: Order (order follows next page) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO SECOND APPEAL No. 1062 OF 2009 J U D G M E N T : This second appeal is filed by the first defendant against the judgment and decree dated 19-12-2005 passed in AS.No. 12 of 2006 by the II-Additional District Judge, (FTC) Sanga Reddy reversing the judgment and decree dated 19-12-2005 passed in OS.No. 35 of 1997 by the Senior Civil Judge, Sanga Reddy. 2. Heard both the learned counsel. 3. The appellant and the first respondent (contesting respondent) have filed compromise memo under Order-23 Rule-3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 4. The terms of the compromise are reproduced as follows: i) The appellant and the respondent No.1 have agreed to share the suit land equally i.e., Ac:2-20 guntas each as indicated in the rough map annexed to the compromise memo. The suit land is also divided into two parts as detailed below: (a) As per the terms of settlement the appellant M.Sivaji has taken Ac:2-20 guntas in suit Survey No. 496 being the eastern half portion of the suit land, which is shown in “red” colour in the sketch and more fully described in the schedule “A” appended to the compromise memo. (b) The respondent No.1 T. Rama devi has taken remaining Ac:2-20 guntas in suit Survey No.496 being the western half portion of the suit land, which is shown in “green” colour in the sketch and more fully described in the schedule “B” appended to the memorandum of compromise. ii) The appellant and the first respondent hereby agree to get the entire suit schedule land surveyed for the purpose of demarcating their respective extents of schedule “A” and “B” properties respectively by an authorised Government Surveyor. That in the event of any deficiency in the extent of land available on ground same shall be equally shared and accordingly adjusted by the appellant and the first respondent equally. iii) The parties hereto admit and acknowledge that the property described in schedule “A” hereunder is in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the appellant, M. Sivaji. iv) The parties hereto admit and acknowledge that the property described in schedule “B” hereunder is in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the first respondent, Smt. T. Rama Devi. v) Both the parties declare that hereafter the appellant shall be the absolute owner and exclusive possessor of an extent of Ac:2-20 guntas which is described in schedule “A”. Similarly the respondent No.1 shall be the absolute owner and exclusive possessor of Ac:2-20 guntas as described in schedule “B” of the memorandum of compromise. vi) The appellant and respondent No.1 hereby declare that the parties hereto shall be entitled to remain in possession and enjoyment of the respective extents as detailed below as that of absolute owners and they do not have any right or claim against each other. vii) The parties agreed to bear their respective costs. SCHEDULE “A” All that land admeasuring Ac:2-20 guntas in suit survey No. 496 situated Isnapur village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak district and bounded as follows: North: Land of Kurma Kistaiah South: Part of survey No. 496 Surya Vamshi Road East: Land belonging to Surya Vamshi Estates West: Land allotted to T. Ramadevi , i.e., the respondent No. 1. SCHEDULE “B”. All that land admeasuring Ac:2-20 guntas in suit survey No. 496 situated Isnapur village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak district and bounded as follows: North: Land of Kurma Kistaiah Sourth: Part of survey No. 496 Surya Vamshi Road East : Land allotted to Sivaji, the appellant West : 66 feet wide Nandigama Road 4. In terms of the above compromise, they agreed to share the suit schedule property equally. The terms of the compromise have been read over and explained to them, they accepted the terms of the compromise. 5. The second appeal is therefore disposed of in terms of the compromise. No costs. ________________________ JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO 30-04-2011 I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO SECOND APPEAL No. 1062 OF 2009 Circulation No. Date:30-04-2011 Court Master : I s L Computer No. 43