IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CR No. 53/2021 Ajay Kapoor …..Petitioner Through: Mr. Virender Bhat, Advocate Vs Anjali Thakur and others .….Respondents Through: Mr. S. K. Anand, Advocate Coram : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE ORDE R (30.12.2025) 01. A civil suit titled “Sudesh Sethi Vs Ajay Kapoor” came to be instituted on file No. 19/Civil of 2017 by the plaintiff-Sudesh Sethi against the defendant-Ajay Kapoor before the court of learned Ist Additional District Judge, Jammu. 02. In said suit, the plaintiff- Sudesh Sethi came to seek a decree of eviction of the defendant-Ajay Kapoor from the suit house No. 147-C A/D, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu along with money recovery of an amount of Rs.2,75,000/- on account of damages for wrongful user and occupation of the demised premises. Sr. No. 129 2 CR No. 53/2021 03. The court of learned Ist Additional District Judge, Jammu, by virtue of an order dated 10.03.2020, came to allow two applications with a direction to the defendant-Ajay Kapoor to deposit arrears of rent amounting to Rs.7,21,280/- (w.e.f. May, 2016 to end February, 2020). 04. Aggrieved of said order, the defendant-Ajay Kapoor came forward with the institution of present civil revision petition under section 115 of the Jammu & Kashmir Code of Civil Procedure, Svt., 1977 with plaintiff-Sudesh Sethi figuring as the respondent. 05. This civil revision petition was instituted on 29.10.2021. 06. During the pendency of the civil revision petition, the respondent/plaintiff-Sudesh Sethi expired on 22.12.2021 which resulted in an application CM No. 1651/2023 for impleadment of his legal representatives allowed vide an order dated 11.09.2023. 07. Thus, in place of the respondent/plaintiff-Sudesh Sethi, his three legal representatives, namely, Anjali Thakur, Geeta Kapoor & Tushar Sethi came to be impleaded as the respondents in the present civil revision petition. 3 CR No. 53/2021 08. Said three legal representatives are said to have even been brought on record of the civil suit as well before the trial Court. 09. During the pendency of this civil revision petition, Anjali Thakur one of the legal representatives of deceased plaintiff-Sudesh Sethi, has come to enter into a mutual settlement with the petitioner/defendant –Ajay Kapoor in terms whereof the petitioner/defendant – Ajay Kapoor intends to withdraw the present civil revision petition. 10. In the Compromise-Deed dated 29.12.2025, copy whereof has been produced by counsel for both sides, namely, Shri Virender Bhat, Advocate & Shri S. K. Anand, Advocate, it is recited therein that the petitioner/defendant – Ajay Kapoor has vacated the demised premises by handing over the vacant possession to Anjali Thakur now figuring respondent No. 1 as one of three legal representatives of the deceased respondent/plaintiff- Sudesh Sethi and who in turn of Compromise-Deed has agreed to withdraw the civil suit pending before the court of learned Ist Additional District Judge, Jammu. 11. Copy of the Compromise-Deed is taken on record. 12. In view of this development, the present civil revision petition is dismissed as compromised. 4 CR No. 53/2021 13. Copy of this order be forwarded to the court of learned Ist Additional District Judge, Jammu for being taken on record of the civil suit and deal with suit in accordance with law. (Rahul Bharti) Judge Jammu 30.12.2025 Muneesh Whether the order is speaking : Yes / No Whether the order is reportable : Yes / No Muneesh Sharma 2026.01.02 14:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document