1 2025:CGHC:27194 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FA No. 84 of 2008 1. Ganendra Prasad Ray, S/o. Late Dr. Nerbada Prasad Ray (Wrongly written as Narmada), Aged about 55 years, R/o. B-8, Shivalik Housing Co- operative Society, Sector 16-A, Vashi Navi Mumbai, 400703 (Maharastra) Present Address House No. 3/572, Raja Talab, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur (CG) 2. Tarun Prasad Ray S/o. Late Dr. Nerbada Prasad Ray (wrongly written as Narmada), aged about 48 years, R/o. House No. 3/572 and 3/573, Raja Talab, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur (CG) ... Appellant(s) versus Smt. Sunanda Mazumdar W/o. Shri Deepak Shankar Mazumdar, Aged about 51 years, R/o. House No. 3/573, Raja Talab, Raipur, Tahsil and District- Raipur (CG) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant (s) : Mr. Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Akash Kundu, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 24/06/2025 1. The instant First Appeal has been filed by the appellants/plaintiffs against the judgment and decree dated 29.02.2008 passed by 12th Additional District Judge (FTC) Rapur in Civil Suit No. 17-A/2006 by which the suit SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2025.06.25 10:27:21 +0530 2 filed by the appellants has been dismissed and it has been declared that the plaintiffs and the defendant are the owner of 1/3rd share of the suit property situated at Rajatalab, Raipur bearing House No. 3/572 and 3/573. 2. During pendency of the appeal, a mediation was carried out by this Court itself and all the parties to the dispute have entered their appearance before this Court through video conferencing and informed the Court that draft compromise has already been prepared by them and they are ready to follow the terms enumerated in the mutual compromise deed. 3. This Court on 08.05.2025 had directed the parties to appear before Additional Registrar (Judicial) of this Court for recording their statements. In pursuance of direction given by this court, the parties have appeared before the Additional Registrar (Judicial) for recording their statement and in unequal terms they have stated that they have agreed to follow conditions enumerated in the mutual compromise deed dated 18.06.2025. Thereafter, an application under Order 23 Rule 3 of the CPC has been filed before this Court wherein mutual compromise deed is annexed with the application which reads as under:- Þ6- ;g fd] i{k Øekad 3] orZeku esa vius ifjokj lfgr izdj.k esa layXu uD’ks ds vuqlkj ,d fgLls ij vkaf’kd :i ls dkfct gS ,oa i{kdkj Øekad 3 i{kdkjksa ds firk ds }kjk fu"ikfnr olh;rukek fnukad 15-02-1992 ij fookn ugha djsxhA i{kdkj Øekad 3 dks fn;k x;k 1@3 ds fgLls ds Åij i{kdkj Øekad 3 ,oa Hkfo"; eas muds okfjlkuksa dk LokfeRo gksxkA 7- ;g fd] ;g mYysf[kr djuk vko’;d gS fd layXu uD’kk Annexure- 1 ds vuqlkj] i{k Øekad 3 dks eqfufliy esu jksM dh rjQ ¼lkeus½ iwoZ ls if’pr fn’kk dh vksj 16 QqV 8 bap ¼lksyg QqV vkB bap½ pkSM+k ,oa mlh rjg] ihNs 3 dh rjQ] iwoZ ls if’pr dh rjQ 16 QqV 8 bap ¼lksyg QqV vkB bap½ pkSM+k Hkwfe@laifRr izkIr dj jgh gSA 8- ;g fd] i{k Ø- 3] eq[; }kj@njoktk vanj tkus ds fy;s eqfufliy esu jksM dh rjQ ¼lkeus½ ls iwoZ ls if’pe dh vksj izkIr laifRr 16 QqV 8 bap ¼lksyg QqV vkB bap½ pkSM+k Hkwfe ij eq[; }kj@njoktk gsrq fuekZ.k djus gsrq Lora= gksxhA blh rjg i{k Ø- 1 ,oa i{k Ø- 2 dks vius&vius fgLls esa izkIr lEifRr@Hkwfe@?kj ds vanj tkus gsrq vyx&vyx eq[; }kj@njoktk eqfufliy jksM dh rjQ ¼lkeus½ ls fuekZ.k djus gsrq Lora= gksaxs] ftlls Hkfo"; esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dh fookn dh fLFkfr ugha cusxhA tSls fd layXu uD’ks Annexure-1 esa n’kkZ;k x;k gSA i{k Øekad 3 dks izkIr Hkwfe@laifRr dk forj.k ,oa pkSgn~nh fuEukuqlkj gksxh bl Åij mYysf[kr uD’ks ds vuqlkj] laifRr@fgLlk] i{k Øekad 3 dks izkIr gksxh vkSj laifRr eki ds vuqlkj Hkwfe dk {ks=Qy 1250 QhV gksxk] bl rjg i{k Øekad 1 dks Hkwfe dk {ks=Qy 1250 oxZQhV ,oa i{k Øekad 2 dks Hkwfe dk {ks=Qy 1250 oxZQhV mudk fgLlk izkIr gksxkA tSls fd layXu uD’ks Annexure-1 esa n’kkZ;k x;k gSA 16 QqV 8 bap pkSM+kbZ i{k Ø- 1 ,oa 2 dk 'ks"k cpk tehu frokjh th dk edku ih-,l- oekZ th dk edku Plot ‘C’ Total= 1250 oxZQhV 75 QhV yack 75 QhV yack 16 QqV 8 bap pkSM+kbZ ¼eqfufliy esu jksM½ South North West East 4 ;g fd i{kdkj Øekad 3 dk 1250 oxZQhV ij iw.kZ :i ls LokfeRo jgsxk ,oa ekSds ij i{kdkj Øekad 1 ds fgLls esa vxj fdlh dkj.k o’k Hkwfe de vkrh gS rks blds fy, i{kdkj Øekad 1 dks dksbZ vkifRr ugha gksxhAÞ 4. Since the compromise has been arrived at between the parties, therefore, judgment and decree passed by the appellate Court is modified to the terms of mutual compromise deed. The mutual compromise deed will be part of the decree. 5. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. A decree be drawn up. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge santosh