M/S Om Scaffolders vs M/S G.S. Developers & Contractors ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 827 Del

$~4
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     CO.PET. 482/2014
      M/S OM SCAFFOLDERS                                 ..... Petitioner
                          Through: Mr. Vikas Tomar, Advocate with Mr.
                          Virender Mangla, AR in person

                          versus

      M/S G.S. DEVELOPERS & CONTRACTORS
      PVT. LTD.                                     ..... Respondent
                       Through: Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Ms. Damini
                       Chawla and Mr. Imran Ali, Advocates with Mr.
                       Gurmit Singh, MD in person
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
                 ORDER

% 03.02.2016

CA 3288/2015 (condonation of delay)

1. This is an application filed by the respondents to seek condonation of delay of 420 days in filing the affidavit in compliance of order dated 04.08.2014.

2. For the reasons given therein, the delay is condoned and the application is allowed.

CO.PET. 482/2014

3. Mr. Gurmit Singh, the Managing Director of the respondent company is present in court.

4. Mr. Chaudhary, the learned counsel for the respondent company, on instructions of Mr. Gurmit Singh, has offered the following terms of CO.PET. 482/2014 page 1 of 4 payment towards full and final settlement of the claim raised by the petitioner. However, in connection with offer, Mr. Chaudhary, makes the following preliminary submissions.

4.1 The respondent company will pay a lumpsum amount of Rs.75,33,130/- which is inclusive of an element of interest at the rate of 9% commencing from 16.03.2013 till 16.03.2016. The interest has been calculated on a sum of Rs.67.19 Lakhs, which both parties agree, is the outstanding principal amount.

4.2 Against the principal sum i.e. Rs.67.19 Lakhs; a sum of Rs.10 Lakhs was paid to the petitioner in the course of mediation proceedings, which ultimately failed.

4.3 Therefore, taking into account, interest at the rate of 9% p.a for the period 16.03.2013 to 16.03.2016 on Rs.67.19 Lakhs plus the balance outstanding principal of Rs.57.19 Lakhs, a lumpsum amount of Rs.75,33,000/- is offered to be paid in the manner indicated hereafter.

(i). Therefore, Mr. Chaudhary, on instructions, of Mr. Gurmit Singh, offers a lumpsum payment of a sum of Rs.75,33,000/- (rounded off).

(ii). That the aforesaid amount (i.e. Rs.75,33,000/-) would be paid, by the respondent company, via ten (10) equal monthly instalments.

(iii). That each instalment will be paid on or before the 20 th day of each English calendar month.

(iv). That towards first instalment, a cheque in the sum of Rs.5 Lakh bearing no.323362 dated 05.01.2016, drawn on Canara Bank, in favour of the petitioner, will be handed over to the counsel for the petitioner in court today. The balance amount qua the first instalment will be paid on or before CO.PET. 482/2014 page 2 of 4 20.02.2016.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, of Mr. Virender Mangla, who is the partner of the petitioner, has accepted the aforesaid offer in court, today.

7. Accordingly, the captioned petition is disposed of, on the following agreed terms :-

(i). That the respondent company will pay a total sum of Rs.75,33,000/- to the petitioner in the manner indicated hereafter.

(ii). That the said amount will be paid in ten (10) equal monthly instalments.

(iii). That each instalment will be paid on or before 20 th day of each English calendar month.

(iv). In so far as the first instalment is concerned, which would commence from 20.02.2016, a sum of Rs.5 Lakh has been paid via a cheque; the details with respect to which, are referred to above. The said cheque has been handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

8. The respondent company will abide by the terms of settlement. 8.1 Mr. Gurmit Singh, will also file an affidavit within one week from today, undertaking therein, personally, that the payments as indicated above, will be made to the petitioner.

8.2 In case there is a breach of the terms of settlement by the respondent company, the petitioner will have liberty to revive the captioned petition. This liberty is given to the petitioner in addition to any other remedy that may be available to it, in law.

CO.PET. 482/2014 page 3 of 4

9. No further orders are called for, in the captioned petition.

                                              RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
FEBRUARY 03, 2016
yg
CO.PET. 482/2014                                           page 4 of 4