Agricultural-land partition decrees must leave division by metes and bounds to revenue authorities under Section 54 CPC.

The parties to a suit for partition of agricultural land signed written compromise terms on 10 July 2026, identifying how the land would be divided, and asked the Trial Court to pass a consent decree.

The Principal Senior Civil Judge, Dwarka, rejected their request by order dated 29 July 2026. The petitioner challenged that order under Article 227 of the Constitution; before the High Court, both sides supported the petition and requested that it be allowed

Whether the Trial Court erred in refusing to record the parties’ written compromise and pass a consent decree partitioning the agricultural land

Whether the parties could present a fresh compromise for the Trial Court’s consideration notwithstanding the impugned order

Section 54 of the Code of Civil Procedure applies to partition of agricultural land: after determining the parties’ shares, the Court is required to send the decree to the revenue authorities for partition in metes and bounds

The Court also recognised that parties may agree to a settlement and present it to the Trial Court, which must examine the compromise and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law

The High Court noted that the parties’ written terms earmarked and divided the agricultural land, but held that Section 54 requires the decree to be sent to the revenue authorities for partition in metes and bounds.

On considering the impugned order, the Court found no error warranting interference under Article 227. It nevertheless clarified that the parties could present agreed terms providing for equal shares, and that the Trial Court should consider any such compromise without being influenced by its earlier order

It did not direct that the existing compromise be recorded or a consent decree be passed. The parties were left free to submit a compromise for the Trial Court’s consideration, and the Trial Court was directed to examine it and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law