The Delhi High Court permitted the withdrawal of the appellant's appeal upon a representation that an out-of-court settlement was reached and an Order 23 Rule 3 application is pending with the trial court.
Permission granted to withdraw the main appeal; appeal disposed of as withdrawn.
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.
$~34
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SACHIN S JAIN
..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Umesh Mishra and Mr. Sunil Kumar Ojha, Advocates
versus
MADAN MOHAN MITTAL & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Chander Shekhar Patney and Ms. Anushree Sharma, Advocates for respondent No.1
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
O R D E R % 13.07.2016
C.M.24444/2016
By way of this application, appellant’s counsel seeks permission to withdraw the main appeal.
Upon notice of this application, learned counsel for respondent submits that he has no objection to this application. It is stated by learned counsel for appellant on instructions that an out of court settlement has been arrived at between the parties and an application under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC is already pending before the trial court.
In view of the above, the present application is allowed and appellant’s counsel is permitted to withdraw this appeal.
The application is disposed of.
FAO 428/2011
Page 1
FAO 428/2011
In view of the order passed in C.M. 24444/2016, this appeal is
disposed of as withdrawn.
SUNIL GAUR, J
JULY 13, 2016
s
FAO 428/2011
Page 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to permit the appellant to withdraw the main appeal when parties have settled out of court.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sachin S Jain
Madan Mohan Mittal & Ors
Sunil Gaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
