IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHl'^^O^^ lA No.1 of 2025 In/And APPEAL SUIT NO: 246 OF 2014 Between: 1. Cherukuri Sriharsha, D/o.Nageswara Rao, Student, aged about 23 years, R/o.Door No.1-2, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 2. Cherukuri Vijaya Rani, D/o.Nageswara Rao, Student, aged about 22 years, R/o.D.No.1-2, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. ...Appellants/Plaintiffs AND 1. Kuchipudi Namaiah, S/o.D.Krishna Murthy, aged about 66 years, R/o.D. No.33-13-2, Seetharamapuram, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2. Kottapalli Seetharam Prasad, S/o.Koteswara Rao, aged about 59 years, R/o.D.No. 16-115, Kankipadu Village and Mandal, Krishna District. 3. Cherukuri Satyanarayna, S/o.Nagaiah, aged about 78 years, R/o.D. No.1, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 4. Smt Cherukuri Rama Kotamma, W/o.Satyanarayana, aged about 75 years, R/o.D.No.1, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 5. Cherukuri Nageswara Rao, S/o.Satyanarayana, aged about 59 years, D.No.1, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 6. Kotha Mounika, W/o.Venkateswara Rao, aged about 25 years, R/o.D. No.2-7/1, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. ...Respondents/Respondents Appeal under Section 96 of C.P.C, praying that the High Court may be pleased to allow the appeal by setting aside the Judgment and Decree dated 29-01-2014 in O.S.No.206 of 2012 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Nandigama, Krishna District. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to record the Compromise as per the Memorandum of Terms of Compromise dated 17-03-2025 accordingly pass the Decree in A.S.No.246 of 2014 in terms of said Compromise. The Appeal Suit and I.A.No.1 of 2025 coming on this day for order as to settlement in the presence of Sri P.Prabhakar Rao, Advocate for the Appellants and of Sri Narasimha Rao Gudiseva, Advocate for the Respondent No.2, and of Sri Sohit Chandra Tripuraneni, Advocate for the Respondent Nos.5 and 6 AND Sri A.Satyanarayana, Advocate and Ch.Laxmi Chaya, Advocate, Appellants and the respondents through respective Advocates, having filed I.A.No.1 of 2025 requesting the Court to pass decree in terms of Memorandum of Compromise entered into between them and upon perusing the grounds of appeal. Judgment and Decree of the Trial Court and the Joint Memorandum of Compromise purporting to have been signed by the parties and their Advocates and filed with the said I.A No.1 of 2025 is appearing from the said Memorandum of compromise that the parties herein have entered into compromise and settled the matter in terms of compromise filed in I.A.No.1 of 2025. This Court DOTH RECORD the terms of the said Joint Memorandum of Compromise the original whereof is filed in the record of the said I.A.No.1 of 2025 and a copy whereof is annexed hereto and Doth in terms of the said Memorandum of Compromise, Order and decree as follows: 1) That the Appeal be and is hereby allowed; 2) That the Judgment and Decree dated 29-01-2014 in O.S.No.206 of 2012 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Nandigama, Krishna District be and are hereby set aside; 3) That consequently the suit be and is hereby decreed in terms of compromise, subject to Rules of registration; 4) That the I.A.No.1 of 2025 be and is hereby allowed; 5) That the terms and conditions of the compromise herein are: 1. That at present the title to the Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule is with the Respondent No.2; 2. That the Appellant No.2 shall pay an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- to the Respondent No.2 Kothapalli Seetha Rama Prasad in lieu of relinquishing his right in the Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in favour of the Appellant No.2 and the Respondent No.2 has agreed to receive said amount of Rs.8,00,000/- from the Appellant No.2 and relinquish his right in Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property. Respondent No.2 also agreed to execute Registered Sale Deed in respect of item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in favour of Appellant No.2 acknowledging the receipt of the said amount of Rs.8,00,000/- by way of D.D.No.665698 dated 18-03-2025 drawn on Saptagiri Grameena Bank towards relinquishing his right in Item No.2 of the plaint schedule property. The parties to the Appeal have come to compromise with free will and consent; 3. That the Appellants No.1 and the Respondents No.5 and 6 have no grievance to this compromise and agreed not to claim any interest in Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in future; 4. That the 1®' Respondent is not necessary to this compromise nor is necessary party to the petition because he has already alienated item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in favour of Respondent No.2 as a G.P.A.Holder of Respondent No.5 who is owner of the said property. Respondent No.5 and 6 who are father and daughter also participated in the compromise. It is pertinent to mention here that the Appellants No.1 and 2 are also daughters of Respondent No.5. The Respondent No.3 and 4 are died pending appeal, but their son being the sole legal heir/legal representative is already on record as Respondent No.S; and 5. That as far as other items of property in the Plaint Schedule are concerned, the Appellants have given up their claim in the Appeal and as such this Hon'bie Court may be pleased to record the above compromise and decree the First Appeal in A.S.No.246/2014 in terms of the above compromise. 6) That there be no order as to costs in this Appeal. Sd/- E. KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// i SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nandigama, Krishna District. 2. Three CD Copies. BSV HIGH COURT BSV DATED:24/03/2025 DECREE § 2 5 MAR 2025 lA No.1 of 2025 In/And AS.No.246 of 2014 Current iieciion . III Co ALLOWING THE lA No.1 of 2025 and ALLOWING THE APPEAL SUIT WITHOUT COSTS IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI A.S.No. 246 OF 2014 BETWEEN: 1. Cherukuri Sriharsha, D/o. Nageswara Rao, Aged about 34 years, R/o.D.No.1-2, Vellanki Village, Veerulapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 2. Cherukuri Vijaya-Rani, D/o. Nageswara Rao Aged about 33 years, R/o.D.No.1-2, Vellanki Village, Veerulapadu Mandal, Krishna District. APPELLANTS AND 1. Kuchipudi Namaiah, S/o. K.Dakshmina Murthy, Aged about 77 years, R/o.D.No.33-13-2, Seetharamapuram, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2. Kottapalli Seetharam Prasad, S/o. Koteswara Rao, Aged about 70 years, R/o.D.No.16-115, Kankipadu Village and Mandal, Krishna District. 3. Cherukuri Satyanarayana (Died) 4. Cherukuri Rama Kotamma (Died) 5. Cherukuri Nageswara Rao, S/o. Satyanarayana, Aged about 70 years, D.No.1, Vellanki Village, Veerulapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 6. Kotha Mounika, W/o. Venkateswara Rao Aged about 36 years, D.No.2-7/1, Vellanki Village, Veerulapadu Mandal, Krishna District. ... RESPONDENTS (Respondent No.1 is not necessary party to the present Compromise Petition) -I voqTy C HJ 5^ ^ u MEMORANDUM OF TERMS OF COMPROMISE It is respectfully submitted that the Appellants herein who are the Plaintiffs in suit O.S.No.206/2012 have filed suit for partition of the suit schedule property into 4 equal shares and for allotment of 2 such shares in their favour with meets and bounds. The Appellants and 6 respondent are daughters of respondent and 3'”'^ respondent is the father, respondent is the mother of 5^^ respondent. Whereas, Respondent Nes. *3, & 4 died. Their legal representatives already on record. A. th The above said suit was filed by the Appellants herein contending that the Plaintiffs and Respondent No.5 and 6 constitute the Joint Hindu Family and owns the suit schedule properties. However, the Respondents 3 to 5 colluded together with an object to defeat the rights of the Appellants the 6‘'^ Respondent brought into existence a settlement deed Dated 07-01-1987 executed by Respondent No.5 in favor of Respondent No.4 for Item No.2 of the schedule property. The Respondent No.3 to 5 have created GPA cum Sale agreement Dated 11-08-2010 in favor of 1®’ Respondent collusively against the interest of the Appellants based on the said settlement deed. Thereafter the 1®* Respondent executed sale deed Dated 16-07-2012 in favour of 2 Respondent. The said item of property being the Joint Family Property the settlement deed 07-01-1987 and GPA cum Sale agreement Dated 11-08-2010 and consequent sale deed Dated 16-07-2012 are null and void and not binding on the appellants. However, the suit filed by the / Appellants was dismissed by its Decree and Judgment Dated 29-01- 2014 against which the present First Appeal in A.S.No.246/2014 was filed. B. nd c. While so, pending First Appeal, Respondent No.3 Cherukuri Satyanarayana died on 18-10-2024 and respondent No.4 Cherukuri O Rama Kotamma, W/o. Satyanarayana died on 02-07-2020. Survived by their only son i.e. respondent Cherukuri Satyanarayana and as such memo was filed before the Hon’bie Court informing that since the 5 Respondent being the sole Legal heir who is already on record there is no necessity to file Legal Representative Petition. th D. It is further submitted that at the instance of elders and well-wishers the dispute arising in the suit was compromised and all the parties agreed to dispose of ^he First Appeal in A.S.No.246/2014 in terms of the compromise. Wl^le pending the above appeal the Appellants/Plaint iffs and the Respondent No.2 herein, with the consent of Respondents Nos.5 and 6 have compromised the subject matter in respect of item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property. >1 I TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE COMPROMtSE:- 1. At present the title to the Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule is with the Respondent No.2. 2. The Appellant, No.2 shall pay an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- to the Respondent No.'2 Kothapalli Seetha Rama Prasad in lieu of relinquishing his right in the Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in favour of the Appellant No.2 and the Respondent No.2 has agreed to receive said amount of Rs.8,00,000/- from the Appellant No.2 and relinquish his right in Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property. Respondent No.2 also agreed to execute Registered Sale Deed in respect of Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in favour of Appellant No.2 acknowledging the receipt of the said amount of Rs.8,00,000/- by way of D.D.No.66569^ dated 1'5-03-2025 drawn on Saptagiri Grameena Bank towards relinquishing his right in Item No.2 of the plaint schedule property. The parties to the Appeal have come to compron^i^ with frae will and consent. Ctt^Hobkaika. 3. The Appellants No.1 and the Respondents No.5 and 6 have grievance to this compromise and agreed not to claim any interest in Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in future. The 1®' Respondent is not necessary to this compromise necessary party to the petition because he has already alienated item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in favour of Respondent No.2 as a G.P.A.Holder of Respondent No..5 who is owner of the said property. Respondent NaS and 6 who are father and daughter also participated in the compromise, it is pertinent to mention here that the Appellants No.1 and 2 are also daughters of Respondent No.5. The Respondent No.3 and 4 are died pending appeal, but their son being the sole legal heir/legal representative is already on record as Respondent No.5. no 4. nor IS 5. As far as other items of property in the Plaint Schedule are concerned, the Appellants have given up their claim in the Appeal and as such this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to record the above compromise and decree the First Appeal in A.S.No.246/2014 in terms of the above compromise. (Cherukuri Sriharsha) Appellant No.1 COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS/ APPELLANTS (Cheru ni) Appellant No.2 (Kottapalli Seetharam Prasad) Respondent No.2 COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT/ No.2 hJ COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT Nos.5 & 6 (Cherukuri N^eswara Rao) Respondent No.5 (Kotha Mounika) Respondent No.6 AMARAVATI DATE: 17-03-2025 \\ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH / TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE // V, PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI lA No.1 of 2025 In/And APPEAL SUIT NO: 246 OF 2014 Appeal filed under Section 96 of C.P.C, praying that the High Court may be pleased to allow the appeal by setting aside the Judgment and Decree dated 29-01-2014 in O.S.No.206 of 2012 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Nandigama, Krishna District. Between: 1. Between: 1. Cherukuri Sriharsha, D/o.Nageswara Rao, Student, aged about 23 years, R/o.Door No.1-2, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 2. Cherukuri Vijaya Rani, D/o.Nageswara Rao, Student, aged about 22 years, R/o.D.No.1-2, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. ...Appellants/Plaintiffs AND 1. Kuchipudi Namaiah, S/o.D.Krishna Murthy, aged about 66 years, R/o.D. No.33-13-2, Seetharamapuram, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2. Kottapalli Seetharam Prasad, S/o.Koteswara Rao, aged about 59 years, R/o.D.No.16-115, Kankipadu Village and Mandal, Krishna District. 3. Cherukuri Satyanarayna, S/o.Nagaiah, aged about 78 years, R/o.D. No.1, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 4. Smt Cherukuri Rama Kotamma, W/o.Satyanarayana, aged about 75 years, R/o.D.No.1, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 5. Cherukuri Nageswara Rao, S/o.Satyanarayana, aged about 59 years, D.No.1, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 6. Kotha Mounika, W/o.Venkateswara Rao, aged about 25 years, R/o.D. No.2-7/1, Vellanki Village, Veerullapadu Mandal, Krishna District. ...Respondents/Respondents lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to record the Compromise as per the Memorandum of Terms of Compromise dated 17-03-2025 accordingly pass the Decree in A.S.No.246 of 2014 in terms of said Compromise. Counsel for the Appellants : SRI P.PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: SRI NARASIMHA RAO GUDISEVA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 & 6: SRI SOHIT CHANDRA TRIPURANENI Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. CH.LASMI CHAYA Counsel for the Respondents: SRI AMBADIPUDI SATYANARAYANA The Court made the following: COMMON JUDGMENT ¥■ APHC010681132014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ife [3368] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI APPEAL SUIT NO:246/2014 Between: 1.CHERUKURI SRIHARSHA, D/0 NAGESWARA RAO. OCC:- STUDENT. R/OF D NO.1-2, VELLANKI VILLAGE, VEERULLAPADU MANDAL, KRISHNA DIST. 2.CHERUKURI VIJAYA RANI, D/0 NAGESWARA RAO, OCC:- STUDENT, R/OF D NO.1-2, VELLANKI VILLAGE, VEERULLAPADU MANDAL, KRISHNA DIST. ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1.KUCHIPUDI NAMAIAH, S/0 D KRISHNA MURTHY, R/OF D NO.33-13-2, SEETHARAMPURAM, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DIST. 2.KOTTAPALLI SEETHARAM PRASAD, S/0 KOTESWARA RAO, R/OF D.NO.16-115, KANKIPADU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KRISHNA DIST. 3.CHERUKURI SATYANARAYNA, S/0 NAGAIAH, R/OF D N0.1, VELLANKI VILLAGE, VEERULLAPADU MANDAL, KRISHNA DIST. 4.CHERUKURI RAMA KOTAMMA, W/0 SATYANARAYANA, R/OF D N0.1, VELLANKI VILLAGE, VEERULLAPADU MANDAL, KRISHNA DIST. 5.CHERUKURI NAGESWARA RAO, S/0 SATYANARAYANA, R/OF D N0.1, VELLANKI VILLAGE, VEERULLAPADU MANDAL, KRISHNA DIST. 6.KOTHA MOUNIKA, W/0 VENKATESWARA RAO, R/OF D NO.2-7/1, VELLANKI VILLAGE, VEERULLAPADU MANDAL, KRISHNA DIST. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. P PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.CH LAXMI CHAYA 2.AMBADIPUDI SATYANARAYANA 3.SOHIT CHANDRA TRIPURANENI 4.NARASIMHA RAO GUDISEVA The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI lA No.1 of 2025 In/And APPEAL SUIT No.246 OF 2014 COMMON JUDGMENT: Heard Sri P.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs and Sri Narasimha Rao Gudiseva, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2, 5 and 6. A Memo of terms of Compromise dated 17.03.2025 wherein the appellants and respondent Nos.2, 5 & 6 have entered into compromise is placed before this Court. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the appellants & respondent Nos.2, 4 & 5 appeared before this Court and produced their respective Aadhar Cards in proof of their identity and requested this Court to record the compromise in this Appeal. Both the learned counsel identified their respective parties in the open Court. 2. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that respondent Nos.3 & 4 are no more and respondent No.5 is the sole surviving legal representative of the deceased respondent Nos.3 & 4 and accordingly, a Memo dated 20.09.2024 in that regard along with death certificates is placed before this Court. 4. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents would further submit that respondent No.1 is only a General Power of Attorney (GPA) holder for respondent No.5 and hence, the appearance of respondent No.1 is not necessary to record the compromise between the parties. Respondent No.2 would submit that he received a Demand Draft from the appellant No.2, for an amount of Rs.8,00,000/-, as referred in the Memo of terms and conditions of compromise and reported willingness to record compromise. In view of the foregoing discussion, the Appeal is allowed setting aside the Judgment and Decree dated 29.01.2014 in OS No.206 of 2012 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Nandigama, Krishna District. Consequently, the suit is decreed in terms of compromise subject to Rules of registration. Copy of Memorandum of Compromise shall be enclosed to the Decree. Accordingly, lA No.1 of 2025 and Appeal Suit No.246 of 2014 stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. 6. 7. 8. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall Sd/- E. KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR stand closed. CSTikq'^FFICER //TRUE COPY// SE To, 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nandigama, Krishna District. (With records) 2. One CC to Sri P.Prabhakar Rao Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Narasimha Rao Gudiseva, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri Sohit Chandra Tripuraneni, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to M/s.CH.Laxmi Chaya, Advocate. [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri Ambadipudi Satyanarayan, Advocate [OPUC] 7. The Section Officer VR Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. (to dispatch the Trial Court records) 8. Two CD Copies BSV (*Along with copy of Joint Compromise Memo in IA.No.1 of 2025 in AS No.246 of 2014.) HIGH COURT BSV DATED:24/03/2025 X 25 MAR 2025 " ^ . Current Section ^ JUDGMENT + DECREE o», lA No.1 of 2025 In/And AS.No.246 of 2014 ALLOWING THE lA No.1 of 2025 and ALLOWING THE APPEAL SUIT WITHOUT COSTS IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI A.S.No. 246 OF 2014 BETWEEN; 1. Cherukuri Sriharsha, D/o. Nageswara Rao, Aged about 34 years, R/o.D.No.1-2, Vellanki Village, Veerulapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 2. Cherukuri VijaykRani, D/o. Nageswara Rao, Aged about 33 years, R/o.D.No.1-2, Vellanki Village, Veerulapadu Mandal, Krishna District. APPELLANTS AND 1. Kuchipudi Namaiah, S/o. K.Dakshmina Murthy, Aged about 77 years, R/o.D.No.33-13-2, Seetharamapuram, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2. Kottapalli Seetharam Prasad, S/o. Koteswara Rao Aged about 70 years, R/o.D.No.16-115, Kankipadu Village and Mandal, Krishna District. 3. Cherukuri Satyanarayana (Died) 4. Cherukuri Rama Kotamma (Died) 5. Cherukuri Nageswara Rao, S/o. Satyanarayana, Aged about 70 years, D.No.1, Vellanki Village, Veerulapadu Mandal, Krishna District. 6. Kotha Mounika, W/o. Venkateswara Rao Aged about 36 years, D.No.2-7/1, Vellanki Village, Veerulapadu Mandal, Krishna District. ... RESPONDENTS (Respondent No.1 is not necessary party to the present Compromise Petition) Vsja,'V .V\o^\k>. he c (LJ U MEMORANDUM OF TERMS OF COMPROMISE A. It is respectfully submitted that the Appellants herein who are the Plaintiffs in suit O.S.No.206/2012 have filed suit for partition of the suit schedule property into 4 equal shares and for allotment of 2 such shares in their favour with meets and bounds. The Appellants and 6 respondent are daughters of 5'^ respondent and 3^^ respondent is the father, 4'*^ respondent is the mother of 5*^ respondent. Respondent Nos. »3, & 4 died. Their legal representatives already on record. th Whereas B. The above said suit was filed by the Appellants herein contending that the Plaintiffs and Respondent No.5 and 6 constitute the Joint Hindu Family and owns the suit schedule properties. However, the Respondents 3 to 5 colluded together with an object to defeat the rights of the Appellants the Respondent brought into existence a settlement deed Dated 07-01-1987 executed by Respondent No.5 in favor of Respondent No.4 for Item No.2 of the schedule property. The Respondent No.3 to 5 have created GPA cum Sale agreement Dated 11-08-2010 in favor of 1®‘ Respondent collusively against the interest of the Appellants based on the said settlement deed. Thereafter the 1 Respondent executed sale deed Dated 16-07-2012 in favour of 2' Respondent. The said item of property being the Joint Family Property the settlement deed 07-01-1987 and GPA cum Sale agreement Dated 11-08-2010 and consequent sale deed Dated 16-07-2012 are null and void and not binding on the appellants. However, the suit filed by the / Appellants was dismissed by its Decree and Judgment Dated 29-01- 2014 against which the present First Appeal in A.S.No.246/2014 was filed. St nd C. While so, pending First Appeal, Respondent No.3 Cherukuri Satyanarayana died on 18-10-2024 and respondent No.4 Cherukuri o Rama Kotamma, W/o. Satyanarayana died on 02-07-2020. Survived by their only son i.e. 5*^ respondent Cherukuri Satyanarayana and as such memo was filed before the Hon’ble Court informing that since the 5 Respondent being the sole Legal heir who is already on record there is no necessity to file Legal Representative Petition. th D. It is further submitted that at the instance of elders and well-wishers the dispute arising in the suit was compromised and all the parties agreed to dispose of ^le First Appeal in A.S.No.246/2014 in terms of the compromise. wRlie pending the above appeal the Appellants/Plaint iffs and the Respondent No.2 herein, with the consent of Respondents Nos.5 and 6 have compromised the subject matter in respect of item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property. II TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE COMPROMtSE:- 1. At present the title to the Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule is with the Respondent No.2. 2. The Appellant No.2 shall pay an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- to the Respondent No.2 Kothapalli Seetha Rama Prasad in lieu of relinquishing his right in the Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in favour of the Appellant No.2 and the Respondent No.2 has agreed to receive said amount of Rs.8,00,000/- from the Appellant No.2 and relinquish his right in Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property. Respondent No.2 also agreed to execute Registered Sale Deed in respect of Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in favour of Appellant No.2 acknowledging the receipt of the said amount of Rs.8,00,000/- by way of D.D.No.66569'& dated 1^03-2025 drawn on Saptagiri Grameena Bank towards relinquishing his right in Item No.2 of the plaint schedule property. The parties to the Appeal have come to comprorm^ with frAe will and consent. CH^Hou.r\(ka- 3. The Appellants No.1 and the Respondents No.5 and 6 have grievance to this compromise and agreed not to claim any interest in Item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in future. no The Respondent is not necessary to this compromise nor is necessary party to the petition because he has already alienated item No.2 of the Plaint Schedule Property in favour of Respondent No.2 G.P.A.Holder of Respondent No.5 who is owner of the said property. Respondent NaS and 6 who are father and daughter also participated in the compromise. It is pertinent to mention here that the Appellants No.1 and 2 are also daughters of Respondent No.5. The Respondent No.3 and 4 are died pending appeal, but their son being the sole legal heir/legal representative is already on record as Respondent No.5. 4. as a 5. As far as other items of property in the Plaint Schedule are concerned, the Appellants have given up their claim in the Appeal and as such this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to record the above compromise and decree the First Appeal in A.S.No.246/2014 in terms of the above compromise. (Cnerukuri Sriharsha) Appellant No.1 r. COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS/ APPELLANTS (Cheru 'ni) Appellant No.2 (Kottapalli Seetharam Prasad) COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT/No.2 Respondent No.2 ^ (Cherukuri Nageswara Rao) COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT Nos.5 & 6 Respondent No.5 C Vv tAovAi\\Kx (Kotha Mounika) Respondent No.6 AMARAVATI DATE: 17-03-2025