The High Court of Jharkhand disposed of an appeal after finding that the matter was settled via JHALSA with an agreed one-time settlement amount deposited by the respondent, making withdrawal of cases and the appeal appropriate.
The appeal was disposed off allowing the withdrawal of the present appeal and all other cases instituted by the appellant.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
F.A. No. 30 of 2020
Rina Devi ..… Appellant
Versus Anurag Pratik ..... Respondent
CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan
For the Appellant : Mrs. Vandana Singh, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Bhaskar Trivedi, Advocate
07/ 11.05.2023 Heard Mrs. Vandana Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Bhaskar Trivedi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
2. It has been submitted by Mrs. Singh learned counsel for the appellant that the matter has been settled at JHALSA and various terms and conditions have been agreed upon which also includes withdrawal of all cases instituted by the appellant including the present appeal.
3. Mr. Bhaskar Trivedi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has submitted that initially an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was paid to the appellant on 31.12.2019 through cash deposit in bank account of the appellant. Subsequently, when the matter was referred to JHALSA the talks of compromise was deliberated upon and both the parties have agreed to settle the case with the condition that the respondent shall deposit amount of Rs.4,50,000/- as one-time settlement in the saving back account of the appellant and consequent to the same amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- has already been deposited.
4. The report of the Mediator is at flag ‘X’ and the terms and conditions incorporated in the agreement has also been perused.
5. A supplementary affidavit has also been filed by the respondent which reveals the respondent has complied with the terms and conditions agreed upon.
6. In such view of the matter therefore this appeal is disposed off.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
sm/pramanik.
Rina Devi
Anurag Pratik
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Deepak Roshan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
