Smt Kamla Devi vs Smt Parvati Taak And Others
2015 Latest Caselaw 9541 Del

$~10
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      CS(OS) 2329/2015
       SMT KAMLA DEVI                               ..... Plaintiff
                        Through : Mr. Sanjay Shah, Advocate with
                        plaintiff in person.

                        versus

       SMT PARVATI TAAK AND OTHERS                ..... Defendants
                      Through : Mr. Ram Kishan Rustani, Advocate
                       for D-1 to D-5 with defendants in person.

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

                        ORDER

% 22.12.2015

I.A.No.26084/2015 (joint application u/O XXIII R 3 CPC)

1. The present compromise application has been filed by the

parties stating inter alia that during the pendency of the present

proceedings, they have arrived at an out of court settlement, which

has been reduced into writing in the Compromise Deed dated

6.12.2015.

2. Counsels for the parties state that in terms of the settlement

arrived at between the parties, the defendants No.1 to 4 have agreed

to pay a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- to the plaintiff in full and final

settlement of all her claims against the suit property. It is submitted

that at the time of executing the Compromise Deed, the defendants

No.1 to 4 had paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the plaintiff and the

balance amount of Rs.15,00,000/- was agreed to be paid on the date

of recording the compromise, i.e., today.

3. Counsel for the defendants hands over three demand drafts

bearing Nos.824358, 824359 and 82460 all dated 19.12.2015 drawn

on Kotak Mahindra Bank, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi in the sum of

Rs.5,00,000/- each one in favour of Shri Khet Ram, wife of the

plaintiff, and two in favour of the plaintiff, to the counsel for the

plaintiff, which are duly accepted by him. Counsel for the plaintiff

states that after receiving the balance amount of Rs.15,00,000/-,

nothing further is due or payable by any of the defendants to the

plaintiff in respect of the suit premises and the suit may be disposed

of.

4. The Court has pursued the present application. The same has

been signed by all the parties, including Mr. Kailash Malhotra, partner

of the defendant No.5/firm, apart from their respective counsels.

Counsel for the defendants No.1 to 5 states that he has filed his power

of attorney on behalf of defendant No.5/firm and the other partners of

the firm are also signatories to the said power of attorney. The

application is supported by the affidavits of the signatories to the

application. Enclosed with the application is a Compromise Deed

dated 6.12.2015, which is taken on record.

5. As counsels for the plaintiff and the defendants jointly state that

their clients have arrived at the aforesaid settlement of their own free

will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any

quarters, there appears no legal impediment in accepting the

settlement. The parties shall remain bound by the terms and

conditions of the settlement recorded in the application as also in the

Compromise Deed dated 6.12.2015.

6. The suit is disposed of in terms of the settlement arrived at and

recorded in the application, while leaving the parties to bear their own

costs.

7. At this stage, learned counsel for the plaintiff states that in view

of the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement at the stage of

pleadings, the plaintiff is entitled to claim refund of 50% of the court

fees in terms of Section 16A of the Court Fees Act.

8. In view of the aforesaid submission made by the counsel for the

plaintiff, the Registry is directed to issue a certificate in favour of the

plaintiff for refund of the court fees under Section 16A of the Court

Fees Act.

9. The dates already fixed in the suit, i.e., 12.1.2016 and

19.1.2016, stand cancelled.

10. File be consigned to the record room.

HIMA KOHLI, J DECEMBER 22, 2015 sk