ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL)

Appellant and Sri Anil Kumar P, General Power of Attorney holder of respondent and their respective Counsel are present. Parties are duly identified by their respective Counsel.

2. Heard the parties on the compromise petition.

3. Parties admit voluntary execution of compromise petition and terms of the same.

4. Compromise petition reads as follows:

Memorandum of compromise petition under order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The appellant and the respondent respectfully submit as follows:

1. The appellant is the defendant and the respondent is the plaintiff before the trial Court. The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of the contract. The appellant is owner of suit schedule property, which is a residential vacant site. The respondent filed a suit for specific performance seeking enforcement of an alleged registered agreement of sale dated 15.3.2017 for sale of the suit schedule property.

2. The respondent had filed a suit in O.S.No.8227 of 2018 pending on the file of the XIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, against the appellant herein seeking specific performance of the contract. The trial Court decreed the suit, however directed the respondent to pay the enhanced consideration amount of Rs.8,00,000/- including the balance of Rs.1,00,000/- under the said Agreement. The judgement and decree was passed on 28.11.2022.

3. Being aggrieved by impugned judgement and decree dated 28.11.2022, the appellant/defendant before the trial Court, filed the instant appeal. This Hon'ble Court was pleased to grant an interim order of stay, staying the execution of the impugned judgment and decree subject to deposit a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-. The appellant has already deposited the said sum of Rs.1,50,000/- before the Hon'ble High Court. The respondent had entered appearance.

4. After appearance of the respondent and after intervention of friends and well wishers, both the appellant and the respondent negotiated and agreed to settle the matter amicably and arrived at the following terms and conditions:

5. It is agreed between the parties, the judgment and decree dated 28.11.2022 passed in 0.S.No.8227 of

2018 is set aside.

6. The appellant and the respondent have agreed to sell the suit schedule property to any third party and out of the sale consideration received from such sale, both appellant and the respondent are entitled for equal share at the ratio of 50% (fifty per cent) each. The respondent herein has agreed to execute the registered sale deed as consenting witness to be executed by the appellant in favour of such third party/prospective purchaser/s. Thus, the respondent shall not have right to enforce the registered agreement to sell dated

15.03.2017.

7. The appellant and the respondent may jointly search a prospective purchaser of the suit schedule property, negotiate and finalize the terms and conditions of the sale so as to get the maximum sale consideration with reasonable and acceptable terms and conditions of the sale. Alternatively, the parties hereto may also individually/independently search a prospective purchaser of the suit schedule property and negotiate sale consideration and other terms and conditions of the sale. In the above manner, if one of the parties finds a prospective purchaser and negotiates the sale consideration and other terms and conditions of the sale and if such sale consideration and other terms and conditions of the sale are acceptable to the other party also, the suit schedule property may be sold to such prospective purchaser in the manner provided herein below. If both the parties find different purchasers with different sale considerations and different terms and conditions of sale, the suit schedule property shall be sold to such party who offers higher sale consideration and better terms and conditions of sale.

8. The appellant has no objection to return the original documents produced by the respondent be