The revision was disposed of by recording the compromise and directing a decree in its terms.

The petitioner, the second defendant in O.S. No. 429 of 2019, filed this petition under Article 227 seeking to strike off the plaint. The plaintiff had brought the suit seeking a declaration that a sale deed dated 18 November 2014 in favour of the petitioner was null and void and not binding on her, along with permanent injunction.

During the revision, the petitioner, the plaintiff, and the first defendant reached a settlement and filed a joint compromise memo signed by the parties and their counsel. The memo recorded, among other terms, a full and final settlement, payments to the respondents and a direction that the plaintiff’s suit be disposed of in accordance with the compromise.

Whether the revision petition could be disposed of by recording the parties’ joint compromise memo.

Whether the Principal District Munsiff, Alandur, should be directed to pass a decree in O.S. No. 429 of 2019 in terms of that memo.

The petition was filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, as stated in the prayer.

The Court cited no statutory provision, precedent, or separate legal test in its reasoning. It proceeded on the basis of the parties’ signed joint compromise memo and directed the trial court to pass a decree in accordance with it.

The Court recorded that the petitioner, plaintiff, and first defendant had reached a settlement and that the joint memo bore the signatures of the parties and their counsel.

In view of that settlement, it disposed of the revision on the agreed terms and directed the trial court to pass a decree reflecting the memo. The Court did not separately determine the merits of the petitioner’s request to strike off the plaint.

The parties’ counsel were directed to place another signed copy of the memo before the Principal District Munsiff, Alandur, who was directed to pass a decree in its terms within four weeks of receiving the High Court’s order.