Soma Devi vs Tej Prakash
2017 Latest Caselaw 426 Del

$~7
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+      RFA 490/2016

       SOMA DEVI                                      ..... Appellant
                          Through: Mr. Arvind Chaudhary, Advocate with
                          appellant in person.

                          versus
       TEJ PRAKASH                                      ..... Respondent
                          Through: Mr. P.D. Gupta, Senior Advocate with
                          Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Advocate

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

                          ORDER

% 24.01.2017

CM No.26367/2016 (for condonation of delay of 202 days in re-filing the appeal)

1. This application has been filed by the appellant praying inter alia for condonation of delay of 202 days in re-filing the accompanying appeal.

2. Pleadings are complete.

3. A reply in opposition to the application has been filed by the respondent. However, Mr. Gupta, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the respondent fairly states that if the Court is inclined to allow the present application for the reasons stated therein, which are rather vague, then the respondent may be restituted with costs imposed on the appellant.

4. No doubt, the explanation sought to be offered in paras 2 and 3 of the

application for seeking condonation of delay of 202 in re-filing the appeal is rather sketchy. However, in the interest of justice, the application is allowed subject to the appellant paying costs of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent, through counsel, within two weeks.

5. The application is disposed of.

RFA 490/2016 and CM APPL. 26366/2016 (stay)

1. The appellant/defendant is aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 08.10.2015 passed against her in a suit for specific performance of an Agreement to Sell dated 07.02.2008 in respect of an immovable property, instituted by the respondent/plaintiff.

2. In the course of arguments, it was enquired from Mr.Chaudhary, learned counsel for the appellant if his client would be ready and willing to negotiate a settlement with the other side. Counsel for the appellant had sought a pass over to enable him to obtain instructions from his client.

3. On the second call, counsel for the appellant states that his client is open to a settlement. The parties have exchanged offers and counter offers and have finally agreed that the appellant shall hand over vacant peaceful possession of the ground floor of the suit premises to the respondent/plaintiff on or before 31.12.2017 and till then, she shall maintain status quo with regard to the title, possession and construction thereof. The appellant shall continue paying the dues towards electricity and water charges in respect of the ground floor of the suit premises to the concerned authorities and at the time of handing over possession to the respondent/plaintiff, she shall furnish NOCs to show that all the electricity and water dues have been paid.

4. The appellant has agreed to execute sale documents/Conveyance Deed in respect of the suit premises in favour of the respondent/plaintiff within four weeks from today. Parties agree that the requisite documents of sale shall be drafted by the respondent and handed over to the appellant for her perusal and signatures, whereafter the parties shall jointly take necessary steps for executing sale documents in favour of the respondent/plaintiff.

5. There is no dispute about the fact that the appellant has already received the entire sale consideration, which is subject matter of the Agreement to Sell and Receipt dated 07.02.2008 and that the respondent/plaintiff is already in occupation of the first floor of the suit premises.

6. The appellant shall file an affidavit undertaking inter alia to abide by the terms and conditions of the settlement recorded hereinabove, within two weeks from today with a copy to the counsel for the respondent. Subject to the same, the appellant shall continue occupying the suit premises till 31.12.2017 and hand over vacant peaceful possession thereof to the respondent/plaintiff on or before the said date.

7. Counsel for the respondent agrees that in view of the fact that the parties have been able to arrive at an amicable settlement, the respondent shall not insist on payment of costs imposed on the appellant in CM APPL. 26367/2016. Further, counsel for the appellant states that as the Court has facilitated a settlement between the parties, the appellant may be issued a certificate for refund of the court fee in terms of Section 16-A of the Court Fee Act.

8. Ordered accordingly. The Registry is directed to issue a certificate in

favour of the appellant for refund of the court fees under Section 16A of the Court Fees Act, as per law.

9. In token of acceptance of the settlement arrived at and recorded above, the appellant and the counsels for the parties shall affix their signatures on the margin of the order sheet.

10. The appeal is disposed of alongwith the pending application.

11. File be consigned to the record room.

HIMA KOHLI, J JANUARY 24, 2017 sk/rkb/mk