1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B.CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.39/2008. Ramavatar Sharma. VERSUS Jagdish Chand Sharma & Another. 13.05.2008. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Dr.R.K.Sharma, for the petitioner. Mr.Manu Bhargava, for the respondent. ***** This is a defendants revision petition against the order dated 03.01.2008 by which the learned trial court has dismissed the application filed by the defendant-petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. As per the case of the defendant, there was a written agreement (ikrarnama) dated 01.08.2007 entered into between the parties and the same related to the right to raise construction in the respective portions of the parties in the house situated at Mohalla Hajari Ka in Alwar. As per the defendant, the aforesaid agreement provided that in case there was any dispute arising out of the terms and conditions of the agreement, the same shall be referred to the two witnesses to the agreement who would act as Arbitrators. The learned trial court dismissed the said application filed in the light of the provisions of Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 2 This court issued notices to the respondent, in pursuance of which the respondents have put in appearance. Since the parties do not dispute the earlier agreement dated 01.08.2007 and the defendant had sought to rely upon the said agreement for the purposes of invoking the arbitration clause and the plaintiff seeks to rely upon the same for the purposes of restraining the defendant from raising construction, the learned counsel for the parties were asked if the matter could be resolved in the light of the agreement dated 01.08.2007. Learned counsel for the parties were also assisted by their respective clients i.e. Shri Ramavatar Sharma and Shri Jagdish Chand Sharma, the defendant and plaintiff respectively. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner produced on record the photographs of the premises in dispute, 5 in all. During the course of hearing, it was agreed between the parties that so far as the wall A-B-C-D, as shown in the photograph No.1 submitted herein, shall be removed by the defendant within a period of three weeks from today. However, the projection over which the aforesaid wall has been constructed namely A-B- D-F-E-G would be kept intact over the chowk. The defendant-petitioner would have a right to raise construction in line of the wall H-I-G-E at point E-F leaving the projection open. No 3 construction on the first floor and above, over the portion G-A-B-D-F-E would be permitted. It would be open, however, for the defendant- petitioner to raise constructions on the first floor and second floor in the line with the walls H-I-G-E-F. Consequently, this revision petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned trial court to pass a decree in the light of the above agreement/compromise between the parties. The parties are directed to appear before the learned trial court on 20.05.2008 along with the certified copy of this order. This revision petition as well as the stay application are accordingly disposed of. Copy of this order be sent to the learned trial court for compliance so as to reach it before 20.05.2008. (DALIP SINGH),J. Solanki DS, Jr.P.A.