Delhi High Court
Tekla Corporation vs Anil Srivastava & Ors on 23 August, 2016
$~32
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 440/2016 & IAs No.18819-20/2014
TEKLA CORPORATION ..... Plaintiff
Through : Mr. Ravin Galgotia, Advocate
versus
ANIL SRIVASTAVA & ORS ..... Defendants
Through : Mr. Siddharth Dias, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
ORDER
% 23.08.2016
I.A. 10058/2016 (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.
2. The terms and conditions of the settlement have been set out in sub-
paras (a) to (e) of para 1 of the application, whereunder the defendants have
acknowledged that the plaintiff is the owner/proprietor of the intellectual
property rights in various software programmes developed by it and have
undertaken that they will abide by the terms and conditions of the Software
Licence Agreement executed with the plaintiff. The remaining terms and
conditions of the settlement have also been set out in the present application.
3. In consideration of the undertakings given by the defendants, the
plaintiff has agreed to forego its claims for damages, delivery up, rendition
of accounts and costs, as prayed for in para 50(b) of the plaint.
4. Counsels for the parties state that the suit may be decreed in terms of
the settlement arrived at between the parties and recorded in the present
application.
5. The Court has pursued the present application. The same has been
signed by the constituted attorney of the plaintiff, defendant No.1 and the
Director of the defendants No.2 and 3, apart from their respective counsels.
The application is supported by the affidavits of the signatories to the
application. Enclosed with the application is a certified copy of the Board of
Resolution of the defendant No.2 and a power of attorney executed in favour
of the signatory to the application, who has signed on behalf of the plaintiff.
6. 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.
7. The suit is decreed in terms of the settlement arrived at and recorded
in the application, while leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the plaintiff states that in view of the
fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement prior to the stage of issues,
the plaintiff is entitled to claim refund of 50% of the court fees in terms of
Section 16A 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.
11. The date already fixed in the matter, i.e., 15.9.2016 stands cancelled.
12. File be consigned to the record room.
HIMA KOHLI, J
AUGUST 23, 2016
sk/mk
