The Court allowed an interim application to dispose of a partition suit based on a compromise settlement agreement between the parties, drawing a decree therefrom.
Application allowed; suit disposed of per settlement agreement; decree to be drawn; Local Commissioner discharged.
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.
$~72
RAJINDER KUMAR & OTHERS ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. S.Shantanu and Mr. Prag Shanker, Advocates. versus JAGDISH CHANDER & OTHERS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Mayank Sharma, Advocate. Mr. Rohit Gandhi, Local Commissioner.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA O R D E R % 13.01.2016
I.A.No. 559/2016(for direction on behalf of Local Commissioner alongwith settlement agreement by the parties)
page 1 of 2
CS(OS) 1798/2012
their disputes in terms of the written settlement agreement dated 17.12.2015 which is signed by the parties to the present suit. In terms of the settlement agreement certain parties have to get the property and the other parties have to get a monetary value of their shares.
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
JANUARY 13, 2016 ib
CS(OS) 1798/2012
page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court can exercise jurisdiction to dispose of a compromise suit despite lack of pecuniary jurisdiction.
Validity and effect of a settlement agreement in a partition suit.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rajinder Kumar & Others
Jagdish Chander & Others
Valmiki J. Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
A civil suit filed on the original side of a High Court exercising ordinary original civil jurisdiction.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
