THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR REVIEW S.A.M.P.No.921 of 2008 & S.A.M.P.No.1263 of 2014 & S.A.No.657 of 1999 COMMON JUDGMENT:-
Second Appeal No.657 of 1999 has been filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 11.08.1997 passed in A.S.No.87 of 1991 by the Additional District Judge, Khammam, whereby and whereunder, the judgment and decree dated 08.07.1991 passed in O.S.No.1 of 1989 by the Subordinate Judge at Sattupalli, has been modified.
Review S.A.M.P.No.921 of 2008 has been filed to review the common judgment dated 11.03.2008 passed in S.A.No.657 of 1999.
Now, S.A.M.P.No.1263 of 2014 has been filed by both the parties along with the memorandum of compromise praying to record the compromise entered between them and to pass a decree accordingly.
Petitioner No.2 and respondents 5 and 6 in S.A.M.P.No.1263 of 2014 are present. It is submitted that Katepalli Ramulamma (second respondent in S.A.M.P.No.1263 of 2014) has given special Vakalat to his counsel Addepalli Suryanarayana. The parties have filed the memorandum of compromise entered into between to the effect that plaintiffs and the legal representatives of defendant Nos.6, 9, 13 and 14 have compromised the matter with regard to the rights of the plaintiffs on the suit schedule property and with regard to the claim and title of defendant No.6 (claimed by Defendant Nos.9, 13 and 14) over Acs.0.39 guntas of land in Survey No.100/A of Somavaram Village, Wyra Mandal, Khammam District. The contents of the memorandum of compromise have been read over to both the parties and they have admitted the same as true and correct. It appears that the parties have voluntarily entered into settlement.
In the circumstances, Review S.A.M.P.No.921 of 2008 is allowed and consequently, the judgment dated 11.03.2008 passed in S.A.No.657 of 1999 by this Court is hereby set aside.
Accordingly, S.A.M.P.No.1263 of 2014 is allowed recording the terms and conditions stipulated in the memorandum of compromise. Consequently, S.A.No.657 of 1999 is disposed of in terms of the compromise. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal, stands closed.
Justice B.Chandra Kumar 16th July, 2014 Bvv