Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ROMESH VERMA
Rajeev Bansal – Appellant
Versus
Parkash Chand – Respondent
Judgment :
Romesh Verma, J.
The present petition arises out of the order, as passed by learned Additional District Judge, Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P., dated 07.07.2025, whereby the application filed by the present petitioner under Section 47 of Civil Procedure Code to issue direction to judgment debtor to release 50% of compensation of land belonging to Smt. Indrawati, has been dismissed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the present petitioner Rajeev Bansal filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent prohibitory injunction in the Court of learned Sub Judge, Nahan. Learned trial Court vide its judgment and decree dated 14.06.1999 dismissed the suit as preferred by the present petitioner. As per averments as made in the plaint, it was alleged that one Shri Kaka Ram, son of Roada Mal was the owner of the land in village Joharon, Tehsil Nahan. He had three sons, namely, S/Shri Shanti Sarup, Ram Sarup and Gopal Dass. Shri Ram Sarup died on 14th Chait 1998, (1941 AD) during the lifetime of his father Kaka Ram and was survived by his wife Indrawati and his son Naresh Kumar. Shri Naresh Kumar also died during the life time of Kaka Ram.
3. It was stated in the plain
A compromise decree's unambiguous terms govern claims over compensation amounts, barring revision attempts by parties seeking to contest prior agreements.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that no suit shall lie to set aside a decree on the ground that the compromise on which the decree is based was not lawful, as per the provisions o....
The executing court cannot go beyond the decree and must respect prior adjudications regarding entitlement to compensation, as established by the doctrine of merger.
Point of Law : It is a settled principle of interpretation of statute that the provisions of any statute are to be interpreted to give effect to each of them to the extent possible without giving any....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the amendment of pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC should be allowed only if it is necessary to determine the real issue in controve....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
