K.T.Sankaran, J.
The appellant filed O.S.No.1303 of 1993 on the file of the Court of the Principal Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram, against the respondent for specific performance of an agreement for sale in respect of thirteen cents of land. It was contended that towards the sale consideration, the appellant/plaintiff paid a sum of ₹10,000/- as advance. The respondent/defendant contested the suit. The trial court decreed the suit in part. The decretal portion of the judgment reads as follows:
“In the result the suit is decreed in the following terms.
(A) That the plaintiff shall be allowed to recover the sum of Rs.10,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12% from 14.10.1992 till the date of realisation of the debt under this decree.
(B) That the prayer for specific performance stands rejected.
A.S. NO. 383 OF 2000 (B) :: 2 ::
(C) That the defendant shall also be held liable for the cost of the suit.”
2. When the appeal came up for hearing, it was referred for mediation. The parties settled the disputes before the Kerala State Mediation and Conciliation Centre and a memorandum of settlement dated 7.10.2014 was entered into and signed by them. The terms of the settlement read as follows:
“The above case came up for mediation on 07.10.2014 at 10.30 A.M. Both parties present and their lawyers present. Matter discussed and the dispute is settled in terms of the following terms and conditions:
1. The respondent/defendant agreed to pay a total amount of Rs.4,15,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs and Fifteen Thousand only) to the appellant/plaintiff. The appellant agreed for the same. The respondent agreed to pay this amount within one month to the appellant. The amount will be paid by Demand Draft.
2. If the amount is paid within one month, there will be no further claim in between the appellant and the respondent and entire claim of the appellant will stand as discharged and satisfied.
A.S. NO. 383 OF 2000 (B) :: 3 ::
3. If the amount is not paid by the respondent to the appellant in terms of the agreement, it will be treated as a decree and the appellant will be entitled to execute the decree against the respondent by creating a charge over the plaint schedule property.”
3. The memorandum of settlement dated 7.10.2014 is recorded and a decree in terms of the memorandum of settlement is passed in modification of the decree passed by the trial court. On default of payment of ₹4,15,000/- as agreed to be paid to the appellant/plaintiff, the same can be recovered by execution of the decree and the plaint schedule property will be a charge for the said decree amount.
The appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated above.
(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge (P.D. RAJAN) Judge ahz/ K.T.SANKARAN & P.D. RAJAN, JJ.
----------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------- A.S.NO.383 OF 2000 (B)
JUDGMENT
10th October, 2014 -------------------------------------------