Gujarat High Court
Padmavati Furniture vs Kanaiyalal Ranchhodbhai Raval on 13 January, 2021
Bench: N.V.Anjaria, A.S. Supehia
C/FA/3379/2019 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3379 of 2019
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2019
In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3379 of 2019
==========================================================
PADMAVATI FURNITURE
Versus
KANAIYALAL RANCHHODBHAI RAVAL
==========================================================
Appearance:
DHRUVIK K PATEL(7769) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR KUNAN B NAIK(3210) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
MR MAHESH BHAVSAR(1781) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MRS HM BHAVSAR(5340) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED(64) for the Defendant(s) No. 3,4
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 13/01/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)
ORDER IN FIRST APPEAL
From the record we notice that the Court (Hon'ble Ms.
Justice Harsha Devani, as she then was, and Hon'ble Ms.
Justice Sangeeta Vishen) had an occasion to pass order dated
27.1.2020 as under.
"1. The learned advocates for the appellant and
the respondent No. 1 have tendered the
Settlements - Affidavits, respectively affirmed by
the appellant and respondent No. 1. The same are
taken on record.
2. Appellant Dineshbhai Kantilal Sheth,
C/FA/3379/2019 ORDER
Proprietor of M/s. Padmavati Furniture and
respondent No. 1 - Kanaiyalal Ranchhodbhai
Raval, both are present in the Court.
3. Stand over to 30th January 2020."
2. As recorded in the aforementioned order, on that date, the
contesting parties were personally present before the Court and
they tendered the settlement arrived at between them. The
settlementaffidavits as was tendered by the parties personally
present, were taken on record by the Court. It appears that on
that date further order was not passed. It was stated jointly by
both the learned advocates Mr.Dhruvik Patel for the plaintiff and
Mr.Mahesh Bhavsar for the respondent No.1 that it was due to
paucity of time that the Court was not able to pass any further
order.
3. Today when the appeal comes up for consideration, learned
advocate for the respective parties reiterated to submit that the
settlement has been arrived at by contesting parties willingly and
out of their own volition. They requested the Court to pass
necessary orders modifying the judgment and decree impugned
in the First Appeal based on the settlementaffidavits.
4. Special Civil Suit No.92 of 2015 was instituted by
respondent No.4 herein for recovery of the amount of
Rs.38,73,396.99/ against the defendant No.4 appellant herein.
The plaintiff was contractor, whereas defendant No.4 had
obtained the contract of repairing and upgradation of a hotel at
Palitana from defendant Nos.1 to 3 Gujarat Tourism Co
operation Limited. It appears that defendant No.4 executed sub
contract on 18.10.2012 in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff
carried out the contract work as per instructions of the
C/FA/3379/2019 ORDER
defendant No.4.
4.1 It is in respect of such contractual arrangement that the
amount was sought to be recovered by the plaintiff from
defendant No.4. Special Civil Suit came to be allowed and
culminated into decree whereby the defendant No.4 was ordered
to pay to the plaintiff Rs.33,81,933.69/ with 6% interest.
5. The plaintiff Kanaiyalal Ranchhodbhai Raval himself has
filed settlement affidavit dated 27.1.2020 which is on record.
Also on record the settlementaffidavit of one Dineshbhai
Kantilal Sheth filed on behalf of defendant No.4 appellant M/s.
Padmavati Furnitures of the same date. Both the settlement
affidavits stand on record having being filed by respective parties
as stated above.
5.1 Both the settlement affidavit are verbatim same and record
the agreement between the parties as under,
"1. I say that I had entered into settlement
agreement with the original plaintiff i.e. Kanaiyalal
Ranchhodbhai Raval and the dispute between us
has been amicably settled, which had been
recorded in the settlement agreement dated 612
2019.
2. I say that as I had deposited Rs.22,00,000/
before the Hon'ble District Court as per the order
dated 21102019 by the Hon'ble High Court of
Gujarat. I say that pursuant to the settlement
agreement as agreed, I have handed over the
C/FA/3379/2019 ORDER
demand draft of Rs.9,00,000/ of bank HDFC
Bank having no.008261 dated 18.12.2019 to
Kanaiyalal Ranchhodbhai Raval.
3. I hereby say that the Judgment and decree dated 29
6.2019 passed by the Hon'ble District Court, Gandhinagar that
"the defendant no.4 is hereby ordered to pay Rs.33,81,933.63/
(Rupees Thirty Three Lacs Eight one Thousand Nine Hundred
Thirty Three and Sixty Nine Paisa Only) to the plaintiff @ 6% per
annum from the date of institution of the suit till its realization". I
hereby say that as per the full and final settlement with the
original plaintiff, I am entitled to pay the amount of
Rs.31,00,000/ which I have paid. I state that I have no
objection if the amount of Rs.22,00,000/ deposited before the
Hon'ble District Court, Gandhinagar is withdrawn by the
Original Plaintiff. I request the Hon'ble Court to modify the
Judgment and Decree and partly allow the First Appeal No.3379
of 2019 accordingly."
5.2 As could be seen from the contents of the settlement
affidavits extracted above, the plaintiff had stated its claim
agreeing to receive total amount of Rs.31,00,000/ from the
defendant No.4. The defendant No.4 agreed to pay the same. It is
further recorded that Rs.22,00,000/ is already deposited by the
defendant before the District Court as per order dated
21.10.2019 passed by this Court. The remaining amount of
Rs.9,00,000/ was required to be paid pursuant to the
settlement and that the said amount is paid as stated in the
settlement affidavit by handing over Demand Draft of
Rs.9,00,000/ in HDFC Bank No.008261 dated 18.12.2019 to
the plaintiff Kanaiyalal Ranchhodbhai Raval.
C/FA/3379/2019 ORDER
6. Thus, the plaintiff and defendant No.4 have arrived at
settlement between them. Both the learned advocates jointly,
and rightly, stated that the contesting parties have settled their
disputes and that the other defendants have no role in the
dispute in the suit which dispute was only between the plaintiff
and defendant No.4.
7. In view of the above settlement and in view of the
statements made by learned advocates for the respective parties,
the impugned judgment and decreed dated 29.6.2019 passed by
the 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar in Special
Civil Suit No.92 of 2015 shall stand modified in accordance with
the settlement. The appeal stands disposed of in accordingly.
Since the settlement is already acted upon by the parties, no
further orders or observations are necessary.
ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION
In view of the disposal of the First Appeal as per above
order, Civil Application does not survive. It stands disposed of
accordingly.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J)
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
Manshi
