The suit filed under CS(COMM) 1497/2016 was disposed of as parties had settled their disputes before the Mediation Centre. Court fee was refunded and pending application disposed similarly.
Suit disposed of; Court fee refunded; Pending application disposed of; Parties remain bound by settlement.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~21
Through: Mr Jeevesh Nagrath and Mr Pratham Sharma, Advs.
versus
M/S S. SUNCON REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS
..... Defendants
Through: Mr Rishi Sehgal, Adv for D-1 along with Mr K.P. Singh, Director
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA
O R D E R % 18.11.2016
Parties have settled their disputes before the Mediation Centre. The suit stands disposed of in terms of the settlement.
As per Section 16 read with Section 89 of the Court Fee Act, court fee be refunded to the plaintiff.
The pending application also stands disposed of.
Parties shall remain bound by their settlement.
DEEPA SHARMA, J
NOVEMBER 18, 2016 bg
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the suit should be disposed of on account of settlement between parties.
Whether court fee should be refunded upon settlement.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mr Atul Atri
M/S S. Suncon Realtors Private Limited & ORS
Deepa Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
A suit of a commercial nature above the specified value, governed by the Commercial Courts Act 2015.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
