Joint application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC to record settlement. Plaintiff filed affidavit; defendant present in person confirming voluntary waiver. Court found terms fair and reasonable.
[Suit disposed of on terms of compromise contained in the application]
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.
$~35.
SH SUNIL KUMAR GUPTA
..... Plaintiff Through: Shweta Mahajan and Mohit Choubey, Advocates
versus
SH ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA
..... Defendant
Through: S.K. Duggal, Advocate
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
%
O R D E R 22.04.2016
I.A. No.4827/2016
This application has been jointly moved by the parties under Order 23 Rule 3 to record their settlement. The application has been signed by the parties and their respective counsels and is also supported by the affidavit of the plaintiff. Though the defendant has not filed the affidavit, he is present in person in court today. He has produced his election ID card bearing no. ACB1204387 dated 23.01.2015, a copy whereof has also been filed on record along with the application.
On my query, he has answered that he has entered into the compromise contained in the application out of his free own will and that he is aware of the terms of the compromise.
Accordingly, the terms of the compromise appear to be fair, just and reasonable and I see no impediment in accepting the same. Accordingly, the suit is disposed of in terms of the said compromise, which shall continue to bind the parties.
VIPIN SANGHI, J
APRIL 22, 2016 sr
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can accept a compromise recorded under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC signed by parties.
Whether the compromise terms are fair and accepted without impediment.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
VIPIN SANGHI
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
