The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellant Counsel for the Respondent s The Court made the following : Sri P.V.Sanjeeva Rao : M.A.K Mukheed : JUDGMENT THE I{ON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI SECOND APPEAL No.362 of 2OL1, JUDGMI}NT: Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, dated O 1.03.2O 1 1, in A.S.No.67 of 2006 on the file of IX Additional Chief Jurlge (F"fC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad, the present second appeal is preferred.

2. A.S.No.67 of 2006 is preferred against the judgment and decree, dated 28.10.2005, in O.S.No.1631 of 2OO1 on the file o1'tl Additional Rent Controller-cum-XlV Junior Civil Judge, H'yderabad.

3. O.S.No. 1631 of 2001 was filed by the respondents in the Second Appeal for a decree of ejectment and to evict the defendan[s (appellants herein) from the ' suit premises 1 l bearing l,lo.1'L-258122 and 23 situated at chikkadpaily, Hyderabad and for damages for use and occupation. The suit was decreed with costs on 29.Lo.2oo5 and directed \ \ 2 JAI(,.' sA._362 2011 dciendants (appellants herein) to vacate and handover vacant possession of the suit schedule propei-t5r. 4- It is subrnitted by learned counsel flor appellant:-: and learnec co'unsel for responderrts that pursuant to Joint Memorandum of rerms of conrprornise filed under orcler xxIII Rule 3 of cPC (annexed- along with l.A.No. L of 2o'2s1, an amicable settleinent was eltcred into by troth the parties and no turther adjudication is necessirjy in the subject matter

5. Recording thc same, the Second Appeal is closed. Itlo order as to costs. Miscellaneolr.s applications pending, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/.P.GOWRI DEPUTY TRAR SECTION OFFICER I I To,

1. The lX Additional Chief Judge, (FTC) CCC., 2. The XIV Junior Civil Judge,-cum- ll Additional [with records] 3. One CC to Sri p.V.Sanjeeva Rao, Advocate IOPUCI 4. One CC to Sri M.A.K Mukheed, Advocate [OpUC]- 5. Two CD Copies Svs /PSL ntroller, Hyderabad (Along with a copy of Joint Memorandum of rerms of compromise) HIGH COURT DATED::03/09/2025 ( * JUDGMENT SA.No.362 of 2011 THE S t a 1 I'r 1 B tlAR 7[l?f, ;I\ *- I CLOSIN,G THE SECOND APPEAL WITH OUT COSTS. * J v (._.- -"_-. ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF TELANGANA AT: HYDER^ABAD Between S.A. No 362 of 2011

1. Shevaram Andani, (Died) per L. R,s 2. Ghanshamdas Andani, (correct Name Ghanshyam Andhani) S/o Shevaram Andani, Aged 58 year-s, Occ: Business.

3. Kamini Devi (Correct Name Kamini Devi Andani), Wo Shivaram Andani, Aged 75 years, Occ: House Wife Both R/o Flat No. A3, 6th Floor, Subishi Valencia, Syed Nagar Road No.12, Banjara-Hills,i Hyderabad-500034. .... Appellants/defendants

1. Meer Mustafa Ali, (Died) 2. Dr. Sat:ira Sultana At.JD W/o Dr. Syed Intesaruddin Ahmed r.)uadri, A/a 60 years, Occ: Medical practitioner, N o 7-8-27 lbl 1, Chikkadpally, Hyder;rbad. R.espon d e n ts/Pl a i nti ffs. JOINT MEMORANDUM OF TERMS OF COMPROMISE FITED UNDER oRpER Xxrrr..ttulE 3 oF CPC 1 2 whereas origihally the father of appellant No. 2 and Husband of Appellant No.3 has obtained suit schedule t{ulgi i.e. premises No. L-t-zs}lzz & 23 situated at Chikadpally Hyderabad fi'om Smt. Wajidunnisa Begum Mother of the Respondent No.2 and wife of ir.espondent No.1 in the year 1983 on a monthly rent of Rs. 500 and the san re was extended from time to time. whereas the Respondents have filed suit for Ejectment, Recovery of Possession and Mesne Profits in 0.S. No. 1631 of 200L, cjn the file of rent controller cum XIV Junior civil Judqe., city civil court, Hyderabad. The same was decreed by Judgment and Decree dated 28-10-2005, aggrieved by the same the Respondent No.1 and 2 has filed appeal in A.s. No. 67 of 2006 on the file of IX Additional Chief Juclge (F.T.C) city civil court at Hyderabad, during the pendency of the said appearl the Appellant No.1 died, hence the L GA"a<Wat Fd^r^'t-] <=--- s_s-.*/t^^ Contd....2 )J 4 5 6 7 B 9 2 Appellant \0.3 has been added as her Legal Heir, and the Respondent No.l also died rence whe respondent'No.2 is bought on record as his sole legal heir, the said appeal was atso dismissed by Judgment and Decree dated 01- 03-2011, try confirming the Judgment and Decree of the trial court' Whereas the Appellants herein aggrieved by the said judgment and decree passed in A. S. No. 67 of 2006 passed bythe Hon'ble IXAddl Chief Judge on 01-03-201 t has preferred the above second appeal in S'A'No' 362120t1' During the pendency of the appeal, the parties have settled upon the mediation and negotiated with the help of well-wishers and respective counsels, as the litigation is pending since more than 20 years' They have agreed to settle the dispute once for all on the following terms and conditions mentionerl hereunder: ThatinptlrsuancetothecompromisetheAppellantshadagreedandvacated the suit sichedule Mulgi's and hancjed over the full and vacant possession of the same to the Respondent No' 2. That in v ew of the handing over of the full and vacant position of the suit schedule Mulgi,s, as a good will gesture the Respondent trto.2 has paid a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs only) to the Appellants' Tiat the lespondent No.2 has also forgone all the arrears of Rent, damages and also authorized the appellants to withdraw the Rents deposited by the appellanE; to the credit of the A.S. No. 671 2006, which are lying in the FDR's' Thatinpursuancetotheabovecompromisetheappellantsareentitledto withdraw the said amounts lying to the credit of the above A'S' No' 67 of 2006in:heFDR'salongwiththeAccruedinterestthereupon'Andthe Respondent has no objection what so ever for withdrawing the said amounB by the a:pellants and further assures the Respondents to sign any such papers or petitions, giving her consent of no objection' That botlr the parties hereby convenient to each other in view of the comprom se entered between them, that they have no claim what so ever in nature against each other, neither the parties concerned nor their legal heirs have anl right, claim in respect of the dispute ended by way of this com,rom se' contd""3 .< *l+o^o- C--ono'>q!gn' 3 10 That the above compromise has been entered between the parties with their free will and consent without any undue force of coercion, and the parties having understood the contents being read over in English and explained in vernacular language have put their signatures. It is, therefore, prayed that the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dispose of the above appeal in terms of the compromise, Aaoagg^,c APPELLANT NO.2 k """-.:i nppELLANJL{).3 --<.-<- 1".O. RESPONDENT NO.2 COUNSEL PPE COU FOR RESPONDENT ,.'t a \ 1: '\ (.- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF TEI.ANGANA AT : HYDERABAD S.A. No 362 of 2011 IoINT MFMORANDUM OF TERMS OF' COMPROMISE FILED UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 3 OF cPc Filed on: .08.2025 FILED BY: M/s.SYED ASHFAQ AHMED (9729) O/a H.No.29-454, First Floor, Keshav Nagar, Neredmet, Secunderabad-500056' Mobile: 9392480056. Email: syedashfaqahmedTT@g mai l.com Counsel for the APPellants.