Delhi High Court
Abhishek Jain vs Manoj Kumar Jain on 22 December, 2021
$~10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 22.12.2021
+ EX.P. 57/2021 & EX.APPL. (OS) 1137-39/2021
ABHISHEK JAIN ..... Decree Holder
Through Mr. K.K. Bhuchar and Mr. Atul
Bhuchar, Advs. with DH in person
versus
MANOJ KUMAR JAIN ..... Judgement Debtor
Through Mr. Ravi Gopal, Adv. with JD in
person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
J U D G M E N T (oral)
EX.APPL. (OS) 1401/2021 (u/S. 151 CPC)
1. The present application has been filed by both the parties for
recording compromise between the parties.
2. Vide order dated 06.12.2021, adjournment was sought to finally arrive
at a settlement.
3. Today, learned counsel for judgment debtor appears and on
instructions, has given an undertaking that matter has been settled between
the parties out of the Court.
4. Learned counsel for the decree holder submits that the terms of
compromise are incorporated in para 4 to 7 and 9 of present application and
accordingly, prayed that the present execution petition be disposed of.
5. Accordingly, para 4 to 7 and 9 are incorporated in the compromise
which are as under:-
"4. That the Judgement Debtor has agreed to pay to the
Decree Holder a total sum of Rs.2,25,00,000/- as per the
Schedule laid down hereinafter, and also on the terms
laid down.
5. The Judgement Debtor has given a schedule, whereby
the Judgement Debtor would be making payments to the
Decree Holder on the terms and conditions as laid down
herein.
The Judgement Debtor has paid to the Decree Holder a
sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs only) by Pay
Order No. 082210 dated 6.12.2021 on Indusind Bank.
Sector-63, Noida. Thereafter, the Judgement Debtor shall
continue paying to the Decree Holder as per his
convenience but shall complete payment of
Rs.1,05,00,000/- latest by August 31, 2022. The
Judgement Debtor shall pay a further sum of Rs.
1,00,00,000/- (Rupees one crore only) on or before June
30, 2023.
6. The Judgement Debtor agrees that if the schedule
detailed above is not adhered to by the Judgement
Debtor, then and in that event, the Decree Holder shall
be entitled to execute the entire decretal amount,
amounting to Rs. 4,94,13,787/- alongwith the interest as
directed in the decree.
7. It is agreed that there are two distinct deadlines for the
payments to be made by the Judgement Debtor:
(i) August 31, 2022 whereby the Judgement Debtor
shall complete a further payment of Rs.
1,05,00,000/- to the Decree Holder.
(ii) June 30, 2023 whereby the Judgement Debtor shall
pay to the Decree Holder a further sum of
Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees one crore only).
If these two payments are made by the scheduled date by
June 30, 2023 the Judgement Debtor would have paid a
total sum of Rs. 2,25,00,000/-. It is agreed that the
Judgement Debtor is liable to pay to the Decree Holder
the entire sums of money as directed in the decrees dated
September 30, 2019 in both the cases named above.
However, it is further agreed that if the Judgement
Debtor makes the two payments as detailed hereinabove,
namely, one by August 31, 2022 and the other by June 30,
2023, the decrees would stand satisfied. However, it is
specifically agreed that even if there is default in
complying with any of the two schedules, as detailed
above, the entire decretal amounts shall be payable by
the Judgement Debtor to the Decree Holder. The
Judgement Debtor has been made to understand that a
default in the payments on the two dates mentioned above
namely August 31, 2022 and June 30, 2023 by even one
day shall make the entire decretal amount payable by the
Judgement Debtor.
However, if the Judgement Debtor makes payments as
detailed above, namely, a sum of Rs. 1,05,00,000/- by
August 31, 2022 and the second payment of Rs.
1,00,00,000/- (Rupees one crore only) by June 30, 2023
both the decrees shall stand satisfied.
9. The Judgement Debtor Manoj Kumar gives an
undertaking to the Court that till the two decrees
mentioned above are satisfied, the Judgement Debtor
shall not sell, mortgage or otherwise transfer his shares
in the following three Companies in any manner
whatsoever. The Companies and the shareholding are as
follows:
(i) Mangalya Infrastructure Private Limited, with its
Registered Office at B-7, Ground Floor, Ashoka
Niketan, Nanak Vihar, Delhi-110092. (51% shares).
(ii) Mangalya Realtech Private Limited with Registered
Office at 3520, Kucha Lalman, Delhi Gate, New
Delhi-110002 (90% shares)
(iii) Mangalya Buildtech Private Limited with Registered
Office at 3520, Kucha Lalman, Delhi Gate, New
Delhi-110002 (26% shares)."
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of judgment debtor, on
instructions, further submits that the judgment debtor undertakes to abide by
the terms of compromise as mentioned in para 4 to 7 and 9 of present
application.
7. The said undertakings of learned counsel for judgment debtor are
accepted and are taken on record.
8. In view of above, the present execution petition and the pending
applications are disposed of in terms of aforesaid compromise.
9. Needless to say, parties shall remain bound by the terms of the
compromise.
10. At this stage, learned counsel for the decree holder prays for refund of
full Court fee.
11. On the aspect of refund of court fee, the relevant provision of Sections
16 & 16 A of Court fees Act, 1870 read as under:
"16. Refund of fee.- Where the Court refers the
parties to the suit to any one of the mode of settlement of
dispute referred to in section 89 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), the plaintiff shall be entitled
to a certificate from the Court authorizing him to receive
back from the collector, the full amount of the fee paid in
respect of such plaint.
STATE AMENDMENT
Delhi- After section 16, following section shall be
inserted namely,-
"16A. Refund of fees on settlement before hearing.-
Whenever by agreement of parties-
(i) Any suit is dismissed as settled out of Court
before any evidence has been recorded on the merits of
the claim; or
(ii) Any suit is compromised ending in a
compromise decree before any evidence has been
recorded on the merits of the claim; or
(iii) Any appeal is disposed of before the
commencement of hearing of such appeal; half the
amount of all fees paid in respect of the claim or claims
in the suit or appeal shall be ordered by the court to be
refunded to the parties by whom the same have been
respectively paid.
Explanation.- the expression "merits of the claim" refers
to matters which arise for determination in the suit not
being matters relating to the frame of the suit, misjoinder
of parties and cause of action, the jurisdiction of the
Court to entertain or try the suit or the fee payable, but
includes matters arising on pleas of res-judicata,
limitation and the like."
12. As per the interpretation of Section 16 A of Court Fees Act, 1870, I
find that the afore-referred Section prescribes that the court fees has to be
refunded in case of suits and appeals only. Accordingly, this Court is of the
view that the decree holder is not entitled to refund of Court fee.
EX.P. 57/2021
13. In view of order passed in EX.APPL. (OS) 1401/2021, no further
order is required to be passed.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
DECEMBER 22, 2021
rk
