The High Court · 2025

...AppellanUDefendant No.3 'illi,Tj:&i[:^ff {,_frfl ?d?irul#:I,,".1?',fl H Asmanghadh, Matakpet, ftiOeriOi'Ol' j:vears,occ

2. Gula Sunanda. D/o Late,Ram Chandra Reddy, Aoed about years, Occ. B usiness, R/o Sheris uda(Vi i uE n i.iji't""i, i,nr f H n District. ...RespondenUplaintiff '3J3,?*?I[i6Bi%h3f.5ffi ,i;:f, itf;lf; ::fiil,i'fi %:B:S,,"e"?vears,occ ...Respondents/Defendants No.1 & 2. Petition undei order XX* Rure 3 0f cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the Appeflant & Respondent No.1 /praintiff to compromise the suit as per the joint compromise memo and accordingry arow A.S No. 122 0f 2021 by dismissing 0.S No. g6 of 2013 on the fire of court of Speciar Sessions Judge for sc/sr (poA) Act 1989 cum Vil Additionar District and Sessions Judge at L.B Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. Counsel for the Appellants : Sri L.Harish Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 : Sri Janardhan Reddy Kotha Counsel forthe Respondent No.2 & 3 : - - - The Court made the following : COMMON JUDGMENT {i \ \ THE HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON'BLE SMT' JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA I.A.No .1 of 2025IN AND A.S.No.122 OF 2O2L JUDGM ENTi ee, Uo,t'tle Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar ShauiLl c o MM ON . When the matter is taken up for hearing' learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has compromised the matter with respondent No' 1 and to that effect' the parties have entered into Memo of Compromise' dated 23'06'2025' to that affect, they have also and filed I'A'No' I of 2025 seeking to a'llow the appeal in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties. He further stated that respondent Nos'2 and 3 are not necessary parties and therefore' the appeal may be dismissed against them'

2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No'I did not disPute the same' In view of the same, this Court is of the considered view that 3. the Present appeal can be disposed of by recording the compromise entered into between the appellant and respondent No.lintermsoftheMemoofCompromise,dated23.06.2025, annexed to I'A'No' I of 2025' \ 2 - 4. Accordingly, I.A.No. 1 of 2O2S is allowed and the appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise entered into between the appellant and respondent No. I utde Memo of Compromise, dated 23'06'2025. The Memo of compromise, datecl 23.06.202s, shalr form part of the decree, so as to enable the parttes to work out the remedies in accordance with the terms of compromise entered into between the parties. So far as appeal against respondent Nos.2 and 3 is concerned, since they are not necessar5, parties, the appeal is dismissed against respondent Nos.2 and 3. There sha.ll be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Applications, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed SD/. SRI NAYANI CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO DEPUry REGISTRAR ro, i ), ,/ secrf6iv orrrcen 1' The spl sessions Judge For Triar of cases sc/sr (poA) ACT-Cum-V, //TRUE COpyil Additionat District Judge, R.n.Oistrici aii_.B.Nagar. , ?. 9n CC to Sri L.Harish, eoro""i" tOFi,l6l ry I ?'15 33 8;i:i""rdhan Reddv ri*'u' ii'o"'te roPUcl VSs (Along with a copy of Memorandum of Compromise) A'i,; H F- ,9,; \ HIGH COURT DATED:2 510612025 COMMON JUDGMENT t.A NO.1 0F 2025 IN/AND AS.No.122 ot 2021 ALLOWING THE I.A NO.1 OF 2025 AND DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL SUIT l/( r /)1, G r Flt. 5 llq t cr. I (_) o t(.\ ?[ Jljllzffi 1, -t- "cii.,'i :. ..-., . I MEMORANDUM OF COMPR OMISE This Memorandum of Compromise is made and executed on this 23.d day of June 2025 at Hyderabad by and between: YANALA NARSIMHA REDDY S/o. Gopal Reddy, aged about 73 years, Occ: Retd trmployee R/o. H.No. 7-92ll Prabhath Nagar, Chaitanyapuri, Hyderabad (HEREINAFTER called as First Party which term shall mean and include all his legal heirs and successors etc.) AND JITTA SURENDER REDDY S/o. Late Anji Reddy, aged about 62 years, Occ: Business, R/o H.No. 16-2-751 /A/31 /C/ll2 & 113, Tirumala Hills, Asmalghad, Malakpet, Hyderabad. (HER-EINAFTER called as Second Party which term shall mean and include all his legal heirs ald successors etc.) .^^ k ..\ WHEREAS the Second party has filed O.S. No. 86 of 2013 for Specihc Performance of Agreement of sale dated 29-08 2012, in respect to land admeasuring Ac. 01 20 gts covered by Sy. No. 206 /8, S1.. No. 2O7/B, Sy.No_ 2O9 lB, SY.No.21Ol8, Sy. No. 21t/8, 216/B siruarect at Bagayath, Ibrahimpatnam Village, Ibrahimpatnam Revenue Mandzrl, R. R District and it was initially filed against Gujja Sunanda and Gujj a Rajitha. WHEREAS the First Party herein got impleaded as Defenriant No.3 in o.S. No. 86 of 2013 claiming that said Gujja Sunanda & Guj ja Rajitha sold suit schedule property 1. Gujja Srinivas Reddy vide sale det:d No. 4T 77 of 2ol3 and delivered vacant physical possession to him ald his name was mutated in revenue records vide proceedings B/1380/13, dated 06-0g-2013 and said G. Srinivas Reddy exec uted AGPA with possession in favour of Donda Buchi Reddy vide document No. 3584 ol 20i4 dated 26-06-21:) 14 zrnd he alienated the property Lo First I)arty vide Sale Deed No. 3625 of 2ot4 dt. 02 o7-2o14 and thereafter his narne is mutated in revenue records vrde proceedings No. B/272/2015, dated 20-04-2015 and he was-issued pattadar pass book and title deed vide Kata No. 2962. WHEREAS the Hor{'ble court of Special Sessions Judge for sc/sr (poA) Act, 1989 cum vll Additionat District and,sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B Nagar decreed o.s. wo. g6 0f2013 dated og-11-202 I in favour of second Parw and aggrieved by same First party preferred AS No. 122 of 2o2l before Hon'ble High Court -2 k 3b*- WHEREAS the First Party & Second Party at the interventions of elders and well-wishers resolved the dispute amicably and entered into compromise. NOUT THIS MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE WITNESSETH AS FOLLOWS

1. The First Party paid an amount of Rs. 87,0O,OO0/- (Rs. Eighty Seven Lakhs Only) to Second Party through cheque No. 267083 dt.23-06 2025, drawn on SBI Prabhatnagar Branch, Chaitariypuri Hyderabad, as per mutual understanding-

2. The First Party sha11 register an extent of 801 Sq. yds out ot t-+SZ Sq-Yds (Ac. 0- 12 gts) in Sy. No. 2O7 facing college road width 3O' feet of Bagayath Ibratrimpatnam Village, Ibrahimpatnam Revenue Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in favour of Second party by executing appropriate registered document ald registration charges shall be borne by Second Par[2.

3. In view of compromise, the Second'Party sha1l withdraw O.S. N. 86 of 2013 on the file of Court of Special Sessions Judge for trail of SC/ST cases (POA) Act 1989-Cum-VII Additional District Judge at L.B. Nagar, Ranga Reddy District and accordingly shall give consent for allowing A.S. No. 122 of 2027 in favour of First Party. -t

4. That in view of compromise the First party and Second party has mutua-lly agreed that there shall not be any cllim or counter claim against each bther, in future, in respect to above mcntioned property and Second Party hereby conhrm sale deed No. 3625 of 2074 and its link documents IN WITNESSS $IHEREOF the First party & Second l)arty have signed this deed with their free will, without anybody,s threat ,r coercion or undue influence on this the 23,d day of June 2025 at Hyd.rabad, in presence of following witnesses: Witnesses : 1 2 k C Y, NARSIM}IA DDY (FIRST PARTY) '-) ITTA t (sEcoND PARTY) NDER REDDY