Delhi High Court
Rakesh Kumar Jain vs M/S Aez Infratech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors on 10 February, 2015
Author: Hima Kohli
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 278/2011 and IAs No.1906/2011, 3534/2011,
9318/2011, 9816/2011, 9817/2011, 9837/2011,
10170/2011, 17539/2011 and 16701/2014
Decided on 10.02.2015
IN THE MATTER OF :
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. A.K. Bajpai, Advocate
versus
M/S AEZ INFRATECH PVT. LTD. & ORS ..... Defendants
Through: Ms. Monika Chauhan, Advocate
CORAM
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)
1. Pursuant to the parties appearing before the learned Mediator
appointed by the Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre, a
Settlement Agreement dated 11.9.2014 has been placed on record.
2. The terms and conditions of the settlement are set out in para 8
of the Settlement Agreement, whereunder the defendants have agreed
to pay a sum of `15,23,00,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Crores Twenty Three
Lacs only) to the plaintiff in full and final settlement of all the plaintiff's
claim against the defendants as raised in the present suit and in
CS(OS)No.2754/2012. It has been further agreed by the parties that
the aforesaid amount shall be paid by the defendants to the plaintiff in
eighteen equal instalments.
3. It is submitted by the counsels for the parties that the first two
instalments of `1.50 lacs and `3.50 lacs have already been paid by the
defendants and for the balance amount, post dated cheques have
been handed over to the plaintiff, which shall be honoured as and
when presented. It has been agreed by the parties that upon the
defendants paying the entire agreed amount to the plaintiff, the
plaintiff shall not be left with any right, title or interest in a plot of land
situated at Sector 11, G-Block, Pratap Vihar, Ghaziabad, UP and the
defendants shall be at liberty to deal with the said immovable property
as they may deem fit.
4. Counsels for the parties jointly state that in view of the aforesaid
settlement, nothing further survives for adjudication in the present
suit and the Settlement Agreement dated 19.9.2014 be taken on
record.
5. The Court has perused the Settlement Agreement dated
11.9.2014. The terms and conditions of the settlement are set out in
para 8 thereof. The same has been signed by the plaintiff, and by the
defendant No.2 for self and as authorized signatory of the defendant
No.1 and of M/s. Stalwart Properties Pvt. Ltd., which is stated to be
the sister concern of the defendant No.1 and also by their respective
counsels and the learned Mediator. Enclosed with the Settlement
Agreement are photocopies of the minute book of the defendant No.1,
a resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the defendant
No.1/company, copies of Form-32 and the attested copies of the
balance sheets of the defendant No.1 and M/s. Stalwart Properties Pvt.
Ltd.
6. As the counsels for the parties state that the parties 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 same. The Settlement
Agreement is taken on record. The parties shall remain bound by the
terms and conditions of the settlement arrived at between them.
7. The suit is disposed of in view of the aforesaid settlement
arrived at between the parties.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the plaintiff states that in view
of the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement through the
court annexed mediation prior to the pleadings being completed in the
suit, the plaintiff is entitled to claim refund of 50% of the court fees in
terms of Section 16-A of the Court Fees Act.
9. 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 50% of the court fees, as per law.
10. The suit is disposed of, along with the pending applications,
while leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
11. File be consigned to the record room.
(HIMA KOHLI)
FEBRUARY 10, 2015 JUDGE
sk
