Dismissed

Shailesh Shah v. Bharat Shantilal Mehta

Bombay HC16 Jul 2014APP/371/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an appeal arising from a summary suit for recovery of a sum of money. The parties orally agreed to settle the dispute by depositing Rs. 1.03 crore with the Prothonotary, subject to which the respondent would withdraw two criminal cases under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the summary suit. The court recorded these terms as conditions for dismissing the

What did the court decide?

The appeal dismissed on condition that the appellant deposits Rs. 1,03,00,00/- by 31 January 2015 with the Prothonotary, upon which the respondent will withdraw the civil suit and the criminal cases u

Shailesh Shah Vs Bharat Shantilal Mehta — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

903-appl-307-14

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL (L) NO. 307 OF 2014 IN SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.62 OF 2013 IN

¶5

SUMMARY SUIT NO.700 OF 2013

Shailesh Shah

.. Appellant

vs.

Bharat S. Mehta .. Respondent

¶10

Mr. Tejas Vora i/b Mr. G.K. Vora and Mr. S.V. Kasar for the Appellant.

¶11

Mr. Harshad Parekh for the Respondent.

¶12

CORAM: MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & M.S.SONAK, J. DATE : 16 July 2014

¶13

P.C.:

¶14

This appeal is directed against the order dated 25 February 2014 of the learned Trial Judge on Summons for Judgment No.62 of 2013 in Summary Suit No.700 of 2013.

¶15

2] A suit has been filed by Mr. Bharat S. Mehta, the respondent-plaintiff for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,17,26,665/- as per particulars of claim annexed to the plaint.

¶16

3] By the impugned order, learned Trial Judge has granted leave to the appellant-defendant to defend the suit upon depositing principal sum of Rs.73,81,257/- [according to the

1 of 4

903-appl-307-14

appellant-defendant, the amount is Rs.73,71,257/-]. The said amount is ordered to be invested in the fixed deposit. Upon the amount being deposited, the suit is ordered to be transferred to the list of commercial causes.

¶21

4] At the hearing of this appeal, learned counsel for the parties states, under instructions of their respective clients who are present in the court, that the parties have agreed to resolve their disputes amicably and have agreed that in full and final settlement of the plaintiff's claim in above suit including principal, interest and cost, the appellant-defendant will pay the respondentplaintiff a sum of Rs.1,03,000,00/-(Rs. One Crore and three lakhs only) within six months from today, i.e., by 31 January 2015.

¶22

5] Learned counsel for the appellant-defendant states that the appellant-defendant will file an undertaking in respect of above terms on or before 31 July 2014.

¶23

6] Learned counsel for the appellant-defendant further states that the amount is proposed to be raised by his client by disposing of his flat and that upon sale of the property the appellant-defendant will deposit a sum of Rs. 1,03,000,00/(Rs. One Crore and three lakhs only) within the aforesaid time limit, with the office of the Prothonotary & Sr.Master of this Court.

2 of 4

903-appl-307-14

7] Learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff states that upon deposit of the aforesaid amount by the appellant-defendant within the above stipulated time limit, the respondent-plaintiff will withdraw two cases i.e. C.C.No.1134/SS/2013 & C.C. No.1135/SS/2013 filed by him under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶28

8] It is further agreed between the parties that after the appellant-defendant deposit the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,03,000,00/- (Rs. One Crore and three lakhs only), the respondent-plaintiff , thereafter, shall withdraw the aforesaid two criminal cases against the appellant-defendant and thereafter the respondent-plaintiff will be permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs.1,03,000,00/- (Rs. One Crore and three lakhs only) from the office of the Prothonotary & Sr.Master and thereafter the respondent-plaintiff will withdraw Summary Suit No.700 of 2013.

¶29

9] It is clarified that upon such withdrawal, the respondent-plaintiff will be entitled to make an application for refund of court fees stamp.

¶30

10] It is agreed between the parties that till aforesaid arrangement is worked out, respondent-plaintiff will not proceed with the aforesaid two criminal cases under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.

¶31

3 of 4

¶32

4 903-appl-307-14

¶33

11] In case of default in depositing the amount of Rs.1,03,000,00/- (Rs.One Crore and three lakhs only) by 31 January 2015, the appeal will stand dismissed without further reference to the court.

¶34

12] The appeal is accordingly stand disposed of in above terms.

¶35

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶36

(M.S.SONAK, J.)

¶37

4 of 4

Shailesh Shah v. Bharat Shantilal Mehta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailesh Shah v. Bharat Shantilal Mehta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Mandar Narhari Parab Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Piloo Fali Bomanji and Another Vs Ms. Mahabanoo Navroz Kotwal

Association of Engineering Workers Vs Indian Smelting and Refinery Co. Ltd. and Wheelabrators Alloys and Castings Co. Ltd.

Trimurti Shikshan Sanstha and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Education and Sports and Ors.

Simplex Infrastructures Limited Vs Housing Development and Infrastructure Ltd., and Others

Asif Ali Siddiquie Vs the State of Maharashtra and 3 Others