Mankind Pharma Ltd vs Sanjeev Kumar Aggarwal And Ors
2015 Latest Caselaw 429 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                        CS(OS) 3633/2014

                                                   Decided on: 16.01.2015

IN THE MATTER OF
MANKIND PHARMA LTD                                     ..... Plaintiff
                           Through: Mr. Niloy Dasgupta, Advocate

                           versus

SANJEEV KUMAR AGGARWAL AND ORS               ..... Defendants
                  Through: Mr. Yash Vardhan, Advocate

CORAM
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

HIMA KOHLI, J. (ORAL)

I.A. 1018/2015 (joint application u/O XXIII R 3 CPC)

1. The present application has been jointly filed by the parties

stating inter alia that they have arrived at a settlement during the

pendency of the present proceedings.

2. Counsels for the parties submit that in view of the

undertakings given by the defendants as recorded in the application

and further, defendants No.1 and 2 having collectively paid a sum

of `3 lacs to the plaintiff towards litigation costs, the plaintiff has

given up the relief of damages prayed for against them. Counsels

for the parties jointly state that the present suit may be decreed in

terms of the settlement arrived at between them.

3. The Court has perused the present application. The same has

been signed by the authorised representative of the plaintiff, the

defendant No.1 for self and as the sole proprietor of the defendant

No.2 and by the authorised representative of the defendant No.3 as

also their respective counsels. The application is supported by the

affidavits of the aforesaid parties. Further, a copy of the Resolution

of the plaintiff/company in favour of the deponent of the affidavit

filed on behalf of the plaintiff in support of the present application

and a letter of authority issued by the partner of the defendant No.3

in favour of the deponent of the affidavit on behalf of the said

defendant have been filed.

4. As the counsels for the parties jointly state that the parties

have arrived at an out of Court 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 is taken on record. The parties shall remain bound

by the terms and conditions of the settlement. The application is

allowed and the suit is decreed in terms of the conditions laid down

therein. As the litigation costs have already been paid by the

defendants to the plaintiff, the parties shall bear their own costs.

5. At this stage, counsel for the plaintiff states that as the

parties have arrived at a negotiated settlement well before the

stage of framing of issues in the suit, the plaintiff is entitled to claim

refund of 50% of the court fees.

6. In view of the provisions of Section 16-A of the Court Fees

Act, 1870, the Registry is directed to issue a certificate in favour of

the plaintiff for refund of the Court fees to the extent of 50%.

7. The suit is disposed of alongwith the pending application.

8. The date already fixed, i.e., 29.01.2015 stands cancelled.

(HIMA KOHLI) JUDGE JANUARY 16, 2015 rkb/sk