Allowed

Pankaj Kumar Jain v. Pawan Kumar Jain

Delhi HC11 Nov 2024CS(OS)/794/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order acknowledges a settlement agreement executed during court mediation. The court found the agreement lawful and satisfied the requirements for decreeing the suit. The suit is decreed in terms of the settlement, directing the registry to draw up a final decree incorporating the agreement.

What did the court decide?

The suit is decreed in terms of the settlement agreement dated 30.07.2024, which forms part of the decree.

Pankaj Kumar Jain Vs Pawan Kumar Jain — Specific Performance | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~33

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CS(OS) 794/2023 & I.A. 8419/2024

¶4

PANKAJ KUMAR JAIN .....Plaintiff

¶5

Through: Mr. Abhishek Aggarwal, Advocate along with plaintiff in person

¶6

versus

¶7

PAWAN KUMAR JAIN .....Defendant Through: Ms. Ramisha Jain, Advocate for D-1 to D-3 with D-2 (through VC)

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 11.11.2024

¶12

The plaintiff is present in person and is identified by learned counsel.

¶13

Learned counsel for the defendant states that a settlement agreement has been executed between the parties before Samadhan-Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre on 30.07.2024. She states that the settlement agreement dated 30.07.2024 has been substantially implemented and the defendants undertake to execute the lease deed and/or the gift deed in favour of the plaintiff as and when he sells the properties which have been agreed to be transferred in his favour and/or whenever he calls upon the defendants to execute the same. She states that the suit can be decreed in terms of this agreement.

¶14

The plaintiff who is present in person confirms the due execution of the settlement agreement and states that he is satisfied with the terms and conditions settlement arrived between the parties.

¶15

The Supreme Court in Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Cherian

¶16

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/11/2024 at 12:19:29

¶17

Varkey Construction Co. (P) Ltd., (2010) 8 SCC 24 while dealing with Section 89 of the CPC has observed that the settlement agreement will have to be placed before the Court for recording it and in disposing of the suit in its terms, the Court should apply the principles of Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC and make a decree in terms of the settlement with regard to the subject matter of the suit, to make such settlement effective.

¶18

This Court has perused the terms of the settlement agreement dated 30.07.2024 and is satisfied that it satisfies the requirements of Order XXXIII Rule 3 CPC. The compromise contained in the said settlement agreement is lawful and therefore, there is no impediment in decreeing the suit in terms of the settlement agreement.

¶19

The statements/undertakings given by the parties are accepted by this Court and the party were held bound by the same.

¶20

The suit is hereby decreed. The settlement agreement dated 30.07.2024 shall form part of the decree. The registry is directed to draw up a decree in terms thereof.

¶21

Pending applications are disposed of.

¶22

Interim orders, if any, stands vacated.

¶23

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J

¶24

NOVEMBER 11, 2024/ msh/MG

¶25

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/11/2024 at 12:19:29

Pankaj Kumar Jain v. Pawan Kumar Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Kumar Jain v. Pawan Kumar Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pijush Kanti Das Vs Pradeep Kumar Das

B.K. Jewellery House Marketing Pvt. Tld Vs Vinay Kumar & Ors.

Sunil Ashra Vs Ram Kishor Ashra & Ors.

Uttam Singh Vs Kamla Devi and Ors.

Smt Usha Magoo Vs Smt Neelam Bhola Since Deceased through Lrs & Ors.

Dushyant Chikara Vs Zeeshan Ali and Anr.

Anjali Khosla Vs Arun Ahuja & Ors.

Shri Atul Chander Paul & Anr. Vs Smt. Satish Paul & Ors.

Taking Industrial Company Limited Vs Navyug Sales Corporation

Pijush Kanti Das Vs Pradeep Kumar Das

Sunil Ashra Vs Ram Kishor Ashra & Ors.

Shri Anant Seth and Ors. Vs M/S Jagat Talkies Distributors & Ors.

Sandhu Family Private Trust Vs Ms Sharnarthi Finance Ltd. and Ors.

M/S Patel Engineering Ltd. and Ujjain Engicon Pvt. Ltd. Vs National Highway Wing of Rcd, Government of Bihar (through Executive Engineer, Nh Division, Motihar