2026:HHC:34788 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA RSA Nos. : 199 of 2017 & 517 of 2012 Decided on            :    17 th   August, 2026 1. RSA No.199 of 2017 Kalawati (deceased) through LRs …Appellants Versus Tika Ram (deceased) through LRs & Another …Respondents 2. RSA No. No.517 of 2012 Kalawati (deceased) through LRs …Appellants Versus Tawarku (deceased) through LR & Others …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 1. RSA No.199 of 2017 For the appellants      :  Appellants in person with Mr. Inder Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent    : Respondent   No.1(b),   who   is   GPA   of respondents   No.1(a),   1(c)   to   1(f),   in person   with  Mr. Hamender   Singh Chandel, Advocate. 2. RSA No.517 of 2012 For the appellants      :  Appellants in person with Mr. Inder Sharma, Advocate. 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:34788 For the respondent    : Name   of   respondent   No.1,   stands deleted. None for respondent No.2. Respondent   No.3(b),   who   is   GPA   of respondents   No.3(a),   3(c)   to   3(f),   in person   with   Mr. Hamender   Singh Chandel, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) The above titled appeals are being decided by a common order. 2. RSA   No.   199   of   2017,   has   been   filed   by   the predecessor­in­interest of the appellants against the judgment and decree dated 27.03.2017, passed by the Court of learned Additional   District   Judge   (I),   Mandi,   Himachal   Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Court’), in Civil Appeal No.68 of 2016, titled as Kalawati versus Tika Ram & Another. 3. Vide judgment and decree dated 27.03.2017, the learned   First   Appellate   Court,   has   dismissed   the   appeal, which, had been preferred, by the predecessor­in­interest of the   appellants,   against   the   judgment   and   decree   dated 30.06.2016, passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior 3 2026:HHC:34788 Division), Karsog, District Mandi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’) in Civil Suit No.76 of 2014, titled as Kalawati versus Tika Ram & Another. 4. Vide judgment and decree dated 30.06.2016, the learned trial Court has dismissed the aforesaid suit filed by predecessor­in­interest of the appellants­Kalawati. 5. RSA   No.517   of   2012,   has   been   filed   by   the predecessor­in­interest of the appellants against the judgment and decree dated 06.06.2012, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Mandi, Camp at Karsog (hereinafter referred to as ‘the First Appellate Court’), in Civil Appeal No.84 of 2011, titled as Kalavati versus Smt. Tawarku & Another. 6. Vide judgment and decree dated 06.06.2012, the learned   First   Appellate   Court   has   dismissed   the   appeal preferred   by   the   predecessor­in­interest   of   the   appellants, against the judgment and decree dated 19.08.2011, passed by the learned trial Court, in Civil Suit No.1 of 2009, titled as Kalavati versus Tawarku & Another. 4 2026:HHC:34788 7. Vide judgment and decree dated 19.08.2011, the learned trial Court has dismissed the suit filed by Kalavati, predecessor­in­interest of the appellants. 8. Today, the parties to the lis have put appearance and submitted that now, the matter has been compromised between the parties, vide compromise Ex.PA. 9. One of the legal representatives of Smt. Kalavati, who, earlier has not been impleaded, in the present appeals, on an application, filed under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, has also been impleaded as appellants No.1(e), in the present appeals. 10. As   per   the   settlement   between   the   parties,   the legal   representatives   of   Shri   Tika   Ram,   who   was   the contesting   defendant,   before   the   learned   trial   Court,   have agreed to transfer the land measuring 03­16­04 bigha, out of the suit land and the land comprising Khasra Nos.867, 868 and   869,   over   which,   the   residential   house   has   been constructed, in favour of the appellants. 11. Respondent No.1(b) in RSA No. 199 of 2017 and respondent No.3(b), in RSA No.517 of 2012­Nanak Chand, 5 2026:HHC:34788 has made the statement in favour of the appellants, on the basis of the GPA, which, according to him, is still subsisting and   the   same   has   not   been   got   cancelled   by   other respondents. 12. In view of the above statement, both the appeals are allowed and the suit of the plaintiffs is decreed, in terms of the compromise, having taken place between the parties, by setting aside the judgment and  decree passed by the learned trial Court, as affirmed by learned First Appellate Court. Parties are bound down by the terms and conditions of  the   compromise,   which   shall   form  part   of   the   decree. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. Pending   application(s),   if   any,   shall   also   stand disposed of. ( Virender Singh ) August 17, 2026( ps ) Judge