M/S Krypton Heights Builders & ... vs M/S Sun Control Systems
2018 Latest Caselaw 2576 Del

$~24
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                           Date of Decision: 24th April, 2018
+                   RFA 736/2016 & CM APPL. 27349/2017
       M/S KRYPTON HEIGHTS BUILDERS
       & INFRASTRUCTURE                         ..... Appellant
                    Through: Mr. Alok Tripathi, Advocate with Mr.
                             Sanjeev Ummat (M:9810606397),
                             sole    proprietor        in    person.
                             (M:8800482088)
                    versus

       M/S SUN CONTROL SYSTEMS                    ..... Respondent
                    Through: Mr. Hem C. Vashisht and Mr. Rahul
                              Malik, Advocates with Mr. Ramesh
                              Gupta (9811070178), one of the
                              partners in person. (M:9811039867)
       CORAM:
       JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. A suit under Order XXXVII of CPC for recovery of Rs.10 Lakhs was filed by the Respondent/Plaintiff (hereinafter, 'Plaintiff') before the Court of learned Additional District Judge.

2. The transaction related to supply of UPVC Windows by the Plaintiff to the Appellant/Defendant (hereinafter 'Defendant'). It is the case of the Plaintiff that there was an outstanding amount of Rs.11,24,435/- towards the supplies made and in order to discharge the said amount, cheque of Rs.10 lakhs dated 31st December, 2012 was issued by the Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff. However, when the same was presented, it was dishonoured with the remark 'FUNDS INSUFFICIENT', vide cheque return memo dated

2nd January, 2013.

3. The counsel for the Defendant on 12th April, 2018 submitted that there was a settlement agreement entered into between the parties, dated 18 th January, 2014 by which the entire dispute was settled for a sum of Rs.3,51,980/- along with C-Forms to be issued by the Defendant to the Plaintiff, but the same was not disclosed by the Plaintiff in its Plaint. It was his submission that there was gross concealment and the leave to defend therefore ought to have been granted. The matter was adjourned in order to enable the parties to seek instructions in respect of the C-Form.

4. On 16th April, 2018, a proposal was made by the Plaintiff that the entire dispute can be resolved upon the payment of Rs.6,50,000/- by the Defendant. Learned counsel for Defendant had submitted that his client is willing to pay a further sum of Rs.1 Lakh apart from Rs.5,00,000/- already deposited in this Court. Report was called and UCO Bank reported that the amount is lying deposited in a Fixed Deposit and upon maturity on 25th May, 2018, the same would be Rs.5,45,952/-. Matter was adjourned in order to enable learned counsel for Plaintiff to file his vakalatnama and to enable parties to be present. Vakalatnama has been filed and is taken on record.

5. Mr. Ramesh Gupta, partner of Plaintiff firm is present and Mr. Sanjeev Ummat, sole proprietor of the Defendant company is also present in the Court. Separate statements of the parties have been recorded today. Parties have agreed to settle their disputes on the terms set out below. The impugned judgment/decree is modified as settled between the parties on the following terms:

i. The Appellant/Defendant has no objection if the entire sum lying

deposited in this Court along with the interest accrued thereon is released in favour of the Respondent/Plaintiff. In addition, he undertakes to pay a sum of Rs.1 Lakh on or before 30 th June, 2018 to the Respondent/Plaintiff by way of NEFT, upon the Bank account details of the Respondent being supplied.

ii. Upon the receipt of the amount lying deposited in FDR and the sum of Rs.1 Lakh, the Respondent/Plaintiff undertakes to withdraw the complaint filed against the Appellant under Section 138 of the NI Act being CC No.16127/2016 pending before the Court of Ms. Priyanka Rajpoot, Ld. MM, North West, Rohini, Delhi.

iii. Upon the payment of these amounts, no further sums shall be due in terms of the impugned judgment/decree to the Plaintiff from the Defendant. The same shall constitute full and final settlement of the entire dispute between the parties relating to the transaction in question.

6. Accordingly, the Registry is directed to release the amount of Rs.5,45,952/- of the Fixed Deposit (minus TDS, as applicable on the interest amount) shall be released to the Respondent/Plaintiff upon maturity on 25th May, 2018. The impugned judgment/decree is modified in terms of the settlement above.

7. Appeal is disposed of as settled. Pending application is also disposed of. List before the Registrar for release of the FDR amount, on 30 th May 2018.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE APRIL 24, 2018/dk