[2025:RJ-JP:38704] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 850/2024 1. Chunni Lal Son Of Shri Gulla, (Deceased During Suit Proceedings) Through Lrs- 1/1. Dhanni Devi Wife Of Late Shri Chunnilal, Resident Of Madhoka Ki Dhani, Village Chop, Via Morija, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur. 1/2. Ramchandra Son Of Late Shri Chunnilal, Resident Of Madhoka Ki Dhani, Village Chop, Via Morija, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur. 1/3. Sitaram Son Of Late Shri Chunnilal, Resident Of Madhoka Ki Dhani, Village Chop, Via Morija, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur. 1/4. Prem Devi Wife Of Not Known Daughter Of Late Chunnilal, Resident Of Singod Kalan, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur. 1/5. Munni Devi Wife Of Gajanand Daughter Of Chunnilal, Resident Of Singod Kalan, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur. ----Defendants/Appellants Versus 1. Satyanarayan Sharma Son Of Shri Jagdish Narayan Sharma, Resident Of Village Mahal, Jagatpura, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur. ----Plaintiff/Respondent 2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Land Holder Tehsildar, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur. 3. Sub-Registrar, Amer, District Jaipur. ----Defendant-Proforma-Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Dinesh Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjay Rahar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 19/09/2025 1. Heard on application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. [2025:RJ-JP:38704] (2 of 3) [CFA-850/2024] 2. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the appellants and the reasons mentioned in the application and more particularly the fact that the respondents-decree holder have also no objection if the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. This Court deems just and proper to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 4. This present appeal has been preferred by the appellants being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and decree dated 23.01.2020 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.12, Jaipur Metropolitan in Civil Suit No.304/2012 whereby, decreed the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for specific performance and for permanent injunction. 5. Learned counsel for the defendants/appellants submits that after passing of the impugned judgment and decree, both the parties with the motivation of Lok Adalat and their relatives have entered into an amicable settlement and have executed a written compromise on 27.02.2020. 6. He further submits that in view of the terms and conditions of the compromise, the decree passed may be set aside. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-decree holder/plaintiff also, on instructions, from the respondent/plaintiff states that both the parties have entered into compromise and they have no objection if the decree set aside in viewof the terms and conditions of the compromise. 8. In view of the aforesaid and more particularly the fact that the parties have entered into a written compromise on 27.02.2020 [2025:RJ-JP:38704] (3 of 3) [CFA-850/2024] and with the agreement of both the parties, the impugned judgment and decree dated 23.01.2020 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.12, Jaipur Metropolitan in Civil Suit No.304/2012 is set aside and both the parties shall abide by terms and conditions of the written compromise. 9. It is made clear that violation of any terms and conditions of the written compromise by any of the parties, shall be treated to be contempt of the Court’s order. 10. Consequently, the present first appeal is disposed of. 11. Stay application as well as pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar /39