IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Civil Suit No.40 of 2006 a/w Civil Suit No.66 of 2014 Date of Decision : 08.07.2025 Civil Suit No.40 of 2006 Arun Duggal …… Plaintiff Versus Ajay Partap Singh and others ……Defendants Civil Suit No.66 of 2014 Prithvi Partap Singh and another …… Plaintiffs Versus Arun Duggal and others ……Defendants Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 Civil Suit No.40 of 2006 For the plaintiff : Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajeet Pal Singh Jaswal, Advocate. For the defendants : Mr. K.D. Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Het Ram Thakur, Advocate, for defendant No.1. Defendant No.2 ex-parte. Mr. Ajay Kumar Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rohit, Advocate, for defendant No.3. Mr. Hakam Bhardwaj, Advocate, vice Mr. Anuj Nag, Advocate, for defendant No.4. Civil Suit No.66 of 2014 For the plaintiffs : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rohit, Advocate, for plaintiff No.1. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes Name of plaintiff No.2 is ordered to be deleted vide order dated 31.03.2021. For the defendants : Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajeet Pal Singh Jaswal, Advocate, for defendant No.1. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate, for defendant No.2. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral) OMP No.924 of 2025 in Civil Suit No.40 of 2006 The contents of the present application and OMP No.470 of 2020 have been perused. 2. By virtue of the present application and application OMP No.479 of 2020 which was disposed of vide order dated 21.10.2024, parties to the suit have entered into a lawful compromise which has been recorded in writing and has been signed by the parties concerned. The present application (OMP No.924 of 2025) records a lawful compromise written and signed by both the parties, i.e. plaintiffs and defendants No.1 and 3, whereas application OMP No.479 of 2020 records a lawful compromise written and signed by both the parties, i.e. plaintiffs and defendants No.2 and 4. 3. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and disposed of accordingly. Civil Suit No.40 of 2006 4. The suit, in the case at hand is decreed in terms of lawful compromise recorded in OMP No.924 of 2025 and OMP No.479 of 2020 entered into inter se parties and duly signed by all concerned. The parties shall be bound by the contents of these applications and shall abide by the terms contained therein. Decree Sheet be prepared accordingly. Refund of Court fee be made payable to the plaintiffs in accordance with the rules since the matter has been compromised prior to recording of evidence in the case at hand. OMP No.925 of 2025 in Civil Suit No.40 of 2006 5. In view of the orders passed in the Civil Suit and in OMP No.924 of 2025, present application has become infructuous and disposed of accordingly. OMP No.923 of 2025 in Civil Suit No.66 of 2014 6. The present application has been filed under Order 23 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code with a prayer for acceptance of the present application on account of a compromise having been entered into between plaintiff No.1 and the defendants and for consequential dismissal of the suit as withdrawn on account of abandonment of claim qua the suit property by the present plaintiff No.1/applicant. 7. No objection has been communicated on behalf of the defendants as well as the co-plaintiff. 8. Considering the averments made in the application, no objection communicated by the other parties and provisions of Order 23 of the Civil Procedure Code, the present application is allowed and in terms of the prayer made therein, the suit on behalf of plaintiff No.1 qua his claim in the suit property against the defendants is dismissed. The application stands disposed of. Civil Suit No.66 of 2014 9. In lieu of the order passed in the application (OMP No.923 of 2025), present Civil Suit is dismissed as withdrawn. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( Bipin Chander Negi) July 08, 2025 (KS) Judge