Decree modified to give effect to the parties’ composite settlement in its entirety.

The respondents/plaintiffs had instituted SCC Suit No. 50 of 2016 before the 3rd Additional District Judge/Judge Small Cause Court, Dehradun, seeking possession of the disputed shop and related monetary reliefs. The suit was decreed on 16 May 2026, directing the defendants to hand over possession within one month and to pay mesne profits at ₹1,000 per day from 12 June 2016 until delivery of possession, along with ₹3,500 as notice costs.

During the civil revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, both parties filed affidavits proposing a settlement. The respondents agreed to accept mesne profits at the reduced rate of ₹500 per day, provided the revisionists vacated and delivered peaceful physical possession of the shop on or before 21 November 2026. The respondents also agreed to adjust the amount already withdrawn or deposited, subject to payment of the balance amount and compliance with the settlement terms.

The revisionists agreed to vacate the shop within the stipulated period, accept the reduced rate of ₹500 per day, and have ₹7,50,000 deposited before the trial court adjusted against the decretal amount.

The amount payable under the respondents’ calculation was ₹19,40,620.80, comprising arrears, mesne profits, notice costs and court fees. After adjustment of ₹7,50,000, the balance payable was stated to be ₹11,90,620.80.

1. Whether the civil revision could be disposed of in terms of the settlement voluntarily proposed and accepted by the parties?

2. Whether the judgment and decree dated 16 May 2026 required modification to reflect the agreed terms regarding delivery of possession, reduction of mesne profits, and adjustment of deposited amounts?

The revision was instituted under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, which permits the High Court to examine the correctness, legality or propriety of an order passed by a court of small causes.

The Court applied the principle that a settlement voluntarily placed on record through affidavits and accepted by both parties may be made the basis for disposal of the proceedings, with the original decree being modified consistently with the agreed terms.

The original decree directed delivery of possession and payment of mesne profits at ₹1,000 per day. During the revision, the respondents offered a conditional reduction of mesne profits to ₹500 per day in exchange for delivery of vacant and peaceful possession by 21 November 2026, while the revisionists accepted the settlement in substance and agreed to pay the balance amount after adjustment of ₹7,50,000.

Since the parties jointly placed the settlement terms before the Court and their counsel confirmed the arrangement, the Court treated the settlement as sufficient to resolve the pending revision. It therefore modified the trial court’s judgment and order in accordance with the settlement rather than adjudicating the revision on merits.

The judgment and order dated 16 May 2026 in SCC Suit No. 50 of 2016 were modified accordingly.

Under the settlement, the revisionists were required to hand over vacant, peaceful and physical possession of the shop on or before 21 November 2026, pay mesne profits at ₹500 per day from 12 June 2016 until delivery of possession, and pay the balance amount after adjustment of ₹7,50,000 already deposited or withdrawn. The respondents retained the right to pursue execution of the original decree if the settlement terms were not complied with.