Delhi High Court
Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Limited vs Chemical Systems Technologies ... on 28 September, 2015
Author: Gita Mittal
$~13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision : 28th September, 2015
+ RFA(OS) 52/2015 & CM No. 9543/2015
SIMBHAOLI SUGAR MILLS LIMITED ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate along
with Mr.Surinder Kumar Tyagi, AR
of the appellant.
versus
CHEMICAL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PVT LTD
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Sanjiv Bahl, Mr.Udit Gupta,
Advocates with Mr.Narinder Singh
Rawat, AR of respondent.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA
GITA MITTAL, J (ORAL)
CM No. 21473/2015 in RFA(OS) 52/2015
1. The present appeal assails the judgment and decree dated 2 nd March,
2015 as corrected by the order dated 20th March, 2015, whereby, the
respondent's suit being CS(OS) No. 1480/2009 stood decreed in its favour
for a sum of Rs.1,80,91,564 (Rupees One Crore Eighty Lacs Ninety One
Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Four) with interest @ 9 % per annum from
the date of filing of the suit till realization.
2. When the appeal first came to be listed on 22nd May,2015, while
issuing notice for 31st August, 2015, learned counsel for the parties had
submitted that they might be given opportunity to explore the possibility of a
negotiated settlement by recourse to mediation.
3. On the next date of hearing i.e. on 31st August, 2015, it was informed
that despite several efforts before the Delhi High Court Mediation and
Conciliation Centre, the mediation failed. It appears that the mediation
process had opened the path of negotiation for the parties engaged
proactively with each other. For the reason, on 31st August, 2015, an
adjournment was jointly requested by the parties as there were now
attempting to resolve their disputes mutually. Such a pro-active engagement
appears to have resulted in settlement which has been placed before us by
way of CM No. 21473/2015 duly filed by the parties under Order 23 Rule 3
of the CPC.
4. The terms of settlement were reduced to writing in the minutes of the
parties' meeting held on 29th August, 2015 between the authorized
representatives of the parties. These terms were also incorporated in a
settlement/compromise deed dated 15th September, 2015, a photocopy
thereof has been placed on record as Annexure A1 to this application.
5. So far as recording of the settlement is concerned, we find that the
terms of settlement have been extracted in para 6 of the joint application
filed before us. The application has been duly signed by Sh. Satinder Kumar
Tyagi, the authorized representative of the appellant as well as by
Mr.Narinder Singh Rawat, the authorized representative of the respondent.
These two persons have also sworn the affidavits in support of the
application which are also enclosed therewith.
6. Learned counsel for the parties submitted that there is an error in
recording the date of the orders in the application which have been permitted
to be corrected in court and initialled by the parties.
7. Additionally, we find on record, a copy of the letter dated 16th
September, 2015 whereby the details of the payment to be made by the
appellant by way of six post dated cheques as detailed in para 10(b) of the
application towards the balance sum of Rs. 90,08,475/- (Rupees Ninety
Lacs Eight Thousand Four Hundred and Seventy Five) is given.
8. A perusal of the settlement would show that the parties have agreed to
stand by the decree. However, the respondent herein has agreed to receive a
sum of Rs.1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lacs) in full and final
settlement of all the disputes between the parties as per settlement deed
dated 15th September, 2015, if the appellant makes the payments strictly as
per the schedule and manner set out in the settlement.
9. In Para 10 (a) of the application, it is being noted by the parties that
pursuant to the orders passed in CS(OS) No. 1480/2009, the appellant had
deposited a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty lacs) with the Registrar
General of this court and the same is being maintained in a Fixed Deposit
Receipt along with interest accrued @ 9 % per annum thereon. The
respondent shall receive Rs.59,91,525/- or the full amount of the Fixed
Deposit Receipt on its discharge as on today.
10. So far as the balance amount of Rs.90,08,475/-, after adjustment of
Rs.59,91,525/- is concerned, the appellant has handed over six post dated
cheques detailed in para 10 (b) (i) to (vi) of the application. An undertaking
is given by the appellant that these cheques would be honoured on
presentation.
11. Apart from these terms of payment, in para 11, we find that it has
been agreed between the parties that in case, the appellant makes the
payment in terms of para 10 of the application, the respondent has no right
to execute the judgment and decree dated 20th March, 2015 passed in
CS(OS) No. 1480/2009. However, in case any of the post dated cheques are
dishonoured on presentation to the bank, the respondent would be entitled to
execute the impugned judgment and decree in the full after adjusting the
amounts received so far from the appellant from the date of dishonour.
12. The parties have also agreed to withdraw all the cases, civil as well as
criminal, filed against each other in para 13 of the application. The parties
have undertaken to cooperate with each other for the quashing of FIR No.
138/2010 and all the proceedings arising therefrom in para 14 of the
application.
13. We accept the undertaking given by the parties in para 16 of the
application to remain bound by the terms of the settlement.
14. Learned counsel for the parties had identified the signatures of their
respective clients and had also confirmed the correctness of the contents of
the application.
15. The settlement is in writing and appears to be bonafide and entered
into without coercion, undue pressure and influence. There is no legal
impediment in accepting the prayer made in the application. We accordingly
accept the prayer made in the application and dispose of the same in terms
thereof.
16. In view of above, so far as the appeal is concerned, the same has to be
dismissed. However, in view of settlement placed before us by way of CM
No. 21473/2015, the execution of the impugned judgment and decree dated
20th March, 2015 shall stand postponed till after the encashment of the last
post dated cheque dated 1st May, 2016 . It is however, made clear that in
case any of the post dated cheques which are handed over to the respondent
is dishonoured, the consequences stipulated in para 12 of the application
would follow and the respondent would become entitled to execute the
judgment and decree dated 20th March, 2015 passed in CS(OS) No.
1480/2009 after adjusting the amounts so received by the respondent till the
date of dishounoured cheque. In case the payments are made by the
appellant in terms of the settlement between the parties, the same shall
tantamount to satisfaction of the full amount of the decree. Inasmuch as, the
respondent has agreed to receive an amount lesser than the full amount of
the decree in full and final satisfaction of its claims, however, subject to
payment being made by the appellant on terms which have been recorded in
the application, the challenge of the decree has to fail.
17. The prayer made by way of CM No. 21473/2015 is accepted. The
parties shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement as agreed between
them.
18. The Registry is directed to forthwith release the full amount of
Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lacs) along with all accruals thereon lying as
Fixed Deposit Receipt with the Registrar General of this court in CS(OS)
No. 1480/2009.
19. The appellant shall be entitled to benefit under Section 16 (a) of the
Court Fee Act. The Registry shall issue the requisite certificate for the
refund of half of all the court fees made.
20. CM No. 21473/2015 is allowed in the above terms.
21. In view of order passed in CM No. 21473/2015, the appeal has to be
dismissed. In view thereof, CM No. 9543/2015 would stand disposed of.
GITA MITTAL
(JUDGE)
I.S.MEHTA
(JUDGE)
SEPTEMBER 28, 2015
j
