Shanti Devi vs Mahi Prakash Sharma
2013 Latest Caselaw 2676 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                         Order delivered on: July 01, 2013

+            CM NO.9508/2013 in MAT. APP.83/2007

      SHANTI DEVI                                              ..... Petitioner
                          Through      Mr.S.S. Lingwal, Adv.


                          versus

      MAHI PRAKASH SHARMA                                    ..... Respondent
                   Through None.


      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH

MANMOHAN SINGH, J. (ORAL)

1. By order dated 15th January, 2013, with the consent of the parties the disputes were referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. With the consent of the parties, Mr.Atul Bhuchar, Advocate was appointed as their Mediator. The meetings were held by the learned Mediator and ultimately the disputes and differences were resolved by amicable settlement. The terms and conditions of settlement were mentioned in para 5 of the settlement agreement dated 23rd January, 2013 which is signed by the petitioner, respondent and two sons of the parties namely Anuj @ Manoj Sharma and Sooraj @ Mohit Sharma. The said settlement is also signed by their respective counsel and Mediator.

2. The matter was referred to the Court and on 1 st May, 2013 as per settlement the respondent had paid total sum of `11,50,000/- to the appellant Shanti Devi who had earlier received `3 lacs and another sum of `8,50,000/-

by way of four drafts which were accepted by her and under her instruction, the appeal was withdrawn by the appellant's counsel. It was also recorded by the Court that parties shall be bound by the terms and conditions of the settlement.

3. After the said settlement, the above mentioned application has been filed for recalling of order dated 1st May, 2013 and setting aside the settlement agreement dated 23rd January, 2013 on the ground that the appellant was not explained and not understood the terms of the settlement which were recorded before the Mediation Centre. The allegations were made by the appellant against her counsel by stating that the said settlement agreement was signed by her in good faith as per the advice of her counsel who had connivance with the respondent for the purpose of preparation of the settlement agreement. She states that her marital status of the applicant has not been determined/settled under the said settlement. The terms of the settlement, therefore, are not binding on the sons of the appellant and are void and against the law. The terms and conditions of the settlement are reproduced as under:

"5. In the course of mediation, it was felt that for the full and final settlement of all the disputes between the parties, it would be expedient if the two sons of Smt. Shanti Devi namely Shri Anuj @ Manoj Sharma and Shri Sooraj @ Mohit Sharma be also called for the mediation session. That today, Smt. Shanti Devi D/o Shri Raj Kumar, Shri Anuj @ Manoj S/o Smt. Shanti Devi, Shri Sooraj @ Mohit Sharma S/o Smt. Shanti Devi are present and have agreed to settle all their disputes and differences with Shri Mahi Parkash Sharma S/o Late Shri Om Prakash Sharma, Respondent in Matrimonial Appeal No.83/2007 on the following terms and conditions:

a) That the Party No.1 and her sons namely Shri Anuj @ Manoj Sharma and Shri Sooraj @ Mohit Sharma have agreed

that from this days onwards they shall cease to have any kind of relationship with the Party No.2.

b) The Party No.1 and her sons Shri Anuj @ Manoj Sharma and Shri Sooraj @ Mohit Sharma have agreed that from this day onwards, they shall have no claim, right, title and interest of any sort in any of the properties whether movable or immovable of the Party No.2.

c) That the Party no.2 has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.11,50,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) to the Party No.1 which amount shall be the full and final amount payable by the Party No.2 to the Party No.1 and her sons in lieu of all their claims against the Party No.2. The two sons have categorically stated that the entire amount be paid to their mother Smt. Shanti Devi.

d) That the Party No.1 and her sons agree to the above said terms and state that they are absolutely agreeable to the said terms. The Party No.2 has agreed to pay the aforesaid sum of Rs.11,50,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) in the manner hereinbelow:-

i) Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only) has been paid today in the Mediation seesion vide banker's cheque bearing No.094558 drawn on State Bank of India, Dwarka Court Branch, New Delhi, dated 22.01.2013.

ii) The Party No.2 assures the Party no.1 and her two sons that he shall pay the remaining amount of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) on or before the 1st May, 2013. In case the Party No.2 makes the payment of the said amount of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) before the 1st May, 2013, the date fixed by the Hon'ble Court, the parties agree that they shall move a joint application under order 23 before the Hon'ble Court. In case the Party No.2 fails to make the payment of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) on or before the 1 st May, 2013, this Settlement Agreement shall cease to have effect and the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs

Only) paid by the Party No.2 to Party No.1 shall stand forfeited by the Party No.1 and the Party No.1 shall be free to pursue all her claims before the Court of law.

e) It is further agreed that after signing of this Settlement Agreement and the further payment of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only), the Party No.1 shall withdraw all the suits/petitions filed by her in all courts of law which are pending adjudication. The Party No.1 states that the following cases are pending for adjudication.

i) Matrimonial Appeal No.83/2007 in the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.

ii) Petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the Party No.1 and her sons namely Shri Anuj @ Manoj Sharma and Shri Sooraj @ Mohit Sharma, pending in the Court of Ms. Koletta Rashmi Kajour, Ld. MM, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, which is fixed for 5th February, 2013.

f) The Party No.1 and 2 agree that all their claims against each other qua their relationship shall stand withdrawn from today and the parties this Settlement Agreement cease to have any kind of relationship with each other from this day onwards.

g) The sons of Smt. Shanti Devi have agreed to become confirming parties to this Settlement Agreement and they state that they too shall have no claim of any nature whatsoever against the Party No.2 in future henceforth.

h) The Party No.1 states that she is not familiar with English vernacular and hence in the presence of the counsel for Party No.1, the contents of the above settlement have been explained to her by the mediator and the counsel as well in the Hindi vernacular and she agrees that the above are correct and true and has appended her signatures in token of having accepted the said terms.

6. The parties hereto confirm and declare that they voluntarily and of their own free will have arrived at this Settlement Agreement with the help of and in the presence of the Mediator.

7. By signing this Agreement, the parties hereto state that they have no further claims or demands against each other and all the disputes and differences in this regard have been amicably settled by the Parties here hereto through the process of Mediation.

8. That the parties undertake before the Hon'ble Court to abide by the terms and conditions set out in the agreement and not to dispute the same hereinafter in the future."

4. I have also been informed by the new counsel of the appellant that one of the sons of the appellant is major. After having gone through the averments made in the application and the submissions made by the counsel for the appellant, I do not find any merit in the application on the following reasons:

a. That the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre with the consent of the parties.

b. Even the appellant agreed for appointment of Mr.Atul Buchar, Advocate to act as Mediator in the matter of mediation and conciliation.

c. The appellant has not denied the factum of signing the settlement agreement dated 23rd January, 2013. She also admitted that both of her sons have also signed the settlement as well as their counsel. d. The said settlement was recorded on 23rd January, 2013 and part payment was also received by her against receipt which is attached along with the settlement agreement.

e. There was no protest on behalf of the appellant before the Court on 1st May, 2013 when the matter was listed and the appeal was withdrawn on the basis of the settlement.

f. Even the present application has been filed by the appellant after the expiry of 26 days when the appeal was withdrawn by the appellant.

g. In the meanwhile, the appellant has also encashed the bank drafts issued by the respondent in favour of the appellant.

5. I am of the considered view that the application which has been filed by the appellant is an afterthought. Such type of litigants should not be encouraged by the Courts. No argument can be advanced now by the appellant that the said settlement agreement is not binding when the same is duly signed by the appellant and her two sons and her Advocate. Even there is delay in approaching the Court. Thus, the appellant's application for recalling the order of the Court is not maintainable. The same is hereby dismissed.

(MANMOHAN SINGH) JUDGE JULY 01, 2013