KHURSHEED Vs. MAHESH CHANDRA GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9.1.05 passed by the Lok Adalat in Civil Suit No. 17- A/2000 pending the court of Additional District Judge, Katni.

(2.) Short facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner no. 1 is mother of the petitioners no. 2 and 3. They owned a property at Katni. Petitioner no. 1 was appointed as power of attorney vide registered power of attorney dated 20th of May, 1995 by petitioners no. 2 and 3. On 26.5.1995, an agreement of sale was executed by petitioner no. 1 on her own behalf and on behalf of remaining petitioners in favour of original respondent no. 1 Mahesh Chandra Gupta (i.e. plaintiff).

(3.) A suit for specific performance was instituted on 14.1.2000 on the basis of said agreement and another agreement dated 1.6.1997. During its pendency, the petitioners executed a registered sale deed in favour of respondent no. 2 on 29.1.2000. After closure of plaintiffs' evidence the case was fixed for evidence of the defendants. On 17.11.04 when the case was fixed for evidence of defendant no. 4, it was disclosed that the parties proposed to enter into amicable settlement. Accordingly, the case was fixed for compromise. Parties made a request for reference of the matter to Lok Adalat for compromise. A compromise petition captioned under order 23 rule 3 of Civil Procedure Code was submitted on 9.1.2005 before the Lok Adalat which accepted the same as lawful and passed the judgment and decree on the basis of the said compromise.