Nikhil Agarwal Vs Priya Agarwal — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Nikhil Agarwal Vs Priya Agarwal — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of as withdrawn in terms of Settlement Agreement dated 25.04.2025; pending applications, if any, disposed of; petitioner granted liberty to move an appropriate application with requisite particulars seeking refund of the fixed deposit receipt held with the Registrar General.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petition is to be disposed of as withdrawn in terms of Settlement Agreement dated 25.04.2025, the six-month case-withdrawal period under clause-(i) of the agreement having expired.

Court's answer

In view of the submissions of both sides and in terms of Settlement Agreement dated 25.04.2025, the present petition is disposed of as withdrawn.

Ratio / Principle

Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Key takeaways

Since counsel could not furnish specifics of the order under which the fixed deposit with the Registrar General was made, the petitioner is granted liberty to move an appropriate application containing the requisite particulars seeking refund of that deposit.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order dated 05.01.2026 of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani (single judge), High Court of Delhi, disposing of CRL.REV.P. 591/2019 (Nikhil Agarwal v. Priya Agarwal) as withdrawn. By order dated 09.05.2025 the parties' inter-se disputes had been recorded as resolved vide Settlement Agreement dated 25.04.2025 arrived at through mediation, under which they resumed co-habitation and agreed, per clause-(i), to withdraw their cases only after six months from signing. With that period elapsed and both counsel concurring, the court disposed of the petition as withdrawn in terms of the agreement, and pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. On the submission that the petitioner had deposited a certain (unquantified) sum by way of fixed deposit receipt with the Registrar General, and counsel's inability to furnish the order under which the deposit was made, the petitioner was granted liberty to move an appropriate application with requisite particulars seeking refund. No statute or precedent case is cited and no impugned order is described in the text.

$~11

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- CRL.REV.P. 591/2019 & CRL.M.A. 10643/2019 NIKHIL AGARWAL .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Amish Aggarwal and Mr. Rahul Yadav, Advocates.

versus

PRIYA AGARWAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vivek Vidyarthi, Mr. Suvigya Vidyarthi, Mr. Sarvagya Vidyarthi, Mr. Nischay Chaudhary, Ms. Apoorva Singh Ms. Rushali Rawat and Ms, Samriddhi Shukla, Advocates.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 05.01.2026

Mr. Amish Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits, that as was recorded in order dated 09.05.2025, the parties have resolved their inter-se disputes vidé Settlement Agreement dated 25.04.2025 arrived at through mediation; and have resumed co-habitation.

Counsel however submits that as per clause-(i) of the settlement agreement, the parties had agreed to withdraw their cases only after expiration of period of 06 months from the date of signing of the agreement.

Counsel submits that that period is now over; and the parties are ready for disposal of the present case.

Learned counsel is present on behalf of the respondent and concurs with the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

In view of the above, and in terms of Settlement Agreement dated 25.04.2025, the present petition is disposed-of as withdrawn.

CRL.REV.P. 591/2019

Page 1 of 2

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 08/01/2026 at 12:45:38

Pending applications, if any, stand disposed-of.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had deposited a certain sum of money by way of a fixed deposit receipt with the Registrar General of this court, which may now be refunded/returned to the petitioner. However, counsel is unable to furnish any specifics of the order under which such deposit was made.

In the circumstances, the petitioner is granted liberty to move an appropriate application containing the requisite particulars, seeking the above relief.

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J

JANUARY 5, 2026 ss

CRL.REV.P. 591/2019

Page 2 of 2

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 08/01/2026 at 12:45:38