SHACHEENDRA DWIVEDI, J.

( 1 ) THEY are heard on admission.

( 2 ) THIS second appeal is preferred by the plaintiff against the impugned judgment and decree which has confirmed the judgment and decree of the trial Court.

( 3 ) THE suit was filed by the appellant for declaration and permanent injunction alleging that he was the bhumiswami and person in possession of the disputed lands, and was, therefore, entitled to get his name so entered in the revenue records. It was also prayed that the respondents be permanently injuncted not to alienate the suit property and not to interfere with the plaintiff's possession of the disputed lands.

( 4 ) THE dispute has a chequered history. The parties are close relatives. During the pendency of the suit, a written-deed of compromise under Order 23, Rule 3 of C. P. C. was filed on 28-4-92 in respect of the disputed lands, which was signed by the plaintiff-appellant and respondents 1 to 4. The signatures of the parties were also duly verified by their respective counsel. But later on, plaintiff-appellant Kailash Narain filed an application in the Court on 24-7-92 that he does not want to stick to the compromise nor wants it to be verified and record

Click Here to Read the rest of this document