Delhi High Court
Virender Singh vs Sri Saktivlas Mission For Health & ... on 27 May, 2015
Author: Hima Kohli
3
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 840/2012 & CC No.104/2012 & IAs No.14837/2012 &
14838/2012
VIRENDER SINGH .... Plaintiff
Through Mr.Manish K.Pathak, Mr.Kunal Narain
Advocates with plaintiff in person
versus
SRI SAKTIVLAS MISSION FOR HEALTH &
CONSCIOUSNESS & ORS. ..... Defendants
Through Mr.V.K.Ahuja, Mr.Neeraj &
Ms.Dipti, Advocates with D-3 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
ORDER
% 27.05.2015
1. At the outset, counsel for the plaintiff states that as a
comprehensive settlement has been arrived at between the plaintiff
and the defendants No.2 & 3, his client may be permitted to delete the
name of defendant No.1 from the array of defendants. Ordered
accordingly. The name of defendant No.1 is permitted to be deleted
from the array of parties. Amended memo of parties shall be filed
within one week, with a copy to the other side.
2. Pursuant to the parties being referred to the Delhi High Court
Mediation & Conciliation Centre, a Settlement Agreement dated
14.5.2015 has been forwarded by the mediation centre.
3. Counsels for the parties state that terms and conditions of the
settlement are recorded in para 8 of the Settlement Agreement dated
14.5.2015 whereunder, the defendants no. 2 and 3 have conceded the
suit for specific performance in favour of the plaintiff and they have
already executed a sale deed in respect of premises bearing No.7,
Block-B2 Extension, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi on 26.5.2015 in
favour of the plaintiff for a total sale consideration of `1,60,50,000/-.
It is stated that out of the aforesaid amount, the plaintiff had
deposited a sum of `99,50,000/- in the Registry in terms of an interim
order dated 30.3.2012 and the said amount is lying in an FDR. The
balance sum of `19,50,000/- has been paid by the plaintiff directly to
the defendants No.2 & 3, which fact is confirmed by the counsel for
the defendants No.2 & 3.
4. Counsels for the parties state that now the balance sale
consideration of `90,50,000/- is receivable by the defendants No.2 & 3
and the said amount may be directed to be released by the Registry in
their favour in equal share and the left over amount including the
interest accrued on the FDR be released in favour of the plaintiff.
5. The Court has perused the Settlement Agreement dated
14.5.2015. The same has been signed by the plaintiff, Dr.E.Srikumar,
the original defendant No.3 for self and as attorney of the original
defendant No.2, and their respective counsels as also by the learned
Mediator. Enclosed with the Settlement Agreement, are the General
Power of Attorney and SPA executed by the original defendant No.2 in
favour of Dr. E. Srikumar and draft copy of the sale deed in respect of
the suit premises.
6. As counsels for the parties 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 said settlement. The
Settlement Agreement dated 14.5.2015 is taken on record. The parties
shall remain bound by the terms and conditions of the settlement
recorded in the Settlement Agreement.
7. The defendants No.2 & 3 shall be entitled to approach the
Registry through counsel for release of a sum of `45,25,000/- each.
Thereafter, the plaintiff shall approach the Registry through counsel
for release of the balance amount along with interest, if any accrued
on the FDR, which shall be so released.
8. The suit is decreed in terms of the settlement arrived at and
recorded in the Settlement Agreement dated 14.05.2015, while
leaving the parties to bear their own expenses.
9. At this stage, counsels for the parties state that in view of the
fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement through court
annexed mediation, they are entitled to claim refund of the court fees
on the plaint and the counter claim in terms of Section 16 of the Court
Fees Act.
10. In view of the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement
though court annexed mediation before the evidence has been
recorded on the merits of the respective claims, the Registry is
directed to issue certificates in favour of the plaintiff and the
defendants No.2 & 3, for refund of the court fees, as per law.
11. The suit and the counter claim are disposed of, along with the
pending application.
File be consigned to the record room.
HIMA KOHLI, J
MAY 27, 2015
mk/ap
