Filed SLP now for bar on limitation of execution of court compromise decree
The present SLPs are arising out of a civil suit seeking specific
performance of an Agreement of sale dt. l 7.9.1962 filed by 1st
respondent/plaintiff against the petitioners herein & ors before the ld. V
Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to
as the ld. trial court at Hyderabad) vide O.S. No.389 / 1969 wherein a
compromise decree dt.21.2.1985 was passed vide E.P. No.58/1984 in
O.S. No.389 / 1969 clauses 2, 3 & 4 thereof as follows:
"2. The judgment debtors have handed over the physical possession
of the above said lands referred to on para No. l in all
aggregating to Ac.12-00 gts., to the dectee holder.
3. The Judgment debtors further agreed to execute and register the
sale deed in respect of the above mentioned Ac.9-00 gts., within
one month and in respect of Ac.3-00 gts., in Sy.No.128 after
getting the lands mutated in the names from this date. Necessary
stamp duty and registration charges shall be borne by the decree-
holder alone.
4. In case of failure or default in executing and register the sale
deed as agreed by the judgment-debtors, the decree-holder is at
liberty to get the same executed through Court."
Instead of seeking implementation and enforcement of the said
compromise decree dt.21.2.1985 under Order 21
Rule 10 CPC, the 1st respondent/ plaintiff filed an application dt.29
/30.6.1992 before the Revenue Authorities under Sec.SA of the
AP(TA) Records of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book
Act, 1971 (In short the ROR Act) seeking
regularization/validation of the same, which is without
jurisdiction. Despite the said compromise decree in his favour,
the 1st respondent/plaintiff did not enclose to go for enforcement
and implementation of the same as he was
admittedly holding land in excess of the agricultural ceiling limit.
Hence, a Division Bench of High Court by an order
dt.7.2.2O05 1n W.A. No.1812/2001 set aside the said
proceedings holding that the said compromise is neither a transfer
"or" an alienation and the same was confirmed by an order
dt.13.10.2015 of this Hon'ble Court in SLP (C) No.10907 /2005.
Thereupon, the 1st respondent/plaintiff filed two execution applications vide E.A. Nos.744 & 745 of 2015 in E.P. No.58/1984 in O.S. No.389/1969 under Order 21, Rule 32(5) r/w
Sec.151 CPC for enforcement of the above compromise decree
dt.21.2.1985 with a delay of about 31 years and the same was dismissed
by the ld. Trial Court Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad on
22.10.2018 holding that the same were barred by Limitation under
Article 136 of the Limitation Act. Challenging the same, the 1st
respondent/plaintiff filed CRP Nos.329/2015 & 350/2019 before the
High Court at Hyderabad and the same were allowed by the impugned
orders dt.2/3.8.2022 on a total misreading of the provisions of law and
evidence. Hence, this common SLP is filed by the petitioners/Judgment
Debtors.
Q1 IS MY SLP IS BECOME CIVIL APPEAL
Asked 3 years ago in Property Law
Religion: Hindu