Subhash Arora v. Sanjay Jain and Ors

ORDER o/o

21.05.2013

¶1Pursuant to being referred to mediation, a comprehensive Settlement Agreement dated

15.05.2013 has been executed by the parties in CS(OS) 687/2010, CS(OS) 1346/2010 and CS(OS) 140/2013.

¶2for the parties jointly state that all the parties present suits are signatories to the Settlement Agreement. The terms and conditions have been set out in para 13 of the Settlement It is stated that in accordance with the terms of the settlement, Shri Subhash Arora [plaintiff in CS(OS) 140/2013] has agreed to pay a sum of ?10,04,00,000/- collectively to Smt. Saroj Shinghari [plaintiff in CS(OS) 687/2010], and Shri Sandeep Bhav Shinghari [defendant No.2 in CS(OS) 687/2010] towards sale consideration of premises bearing No.A-1/3, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi, after deducting the money that has already been received by the aforesaid parties from Shri Sanjay Jain [defendant No.l in CS(OS) , 687/2010] and Shri Subhash Arora [plaintiff in CS(OS) 140/2013], ' which is now calculated to be a sum of ?7,79,00,000/-. The terms and conditions of the payment and the manner in which the said amount I CS(OS) 687/2010 &connected matters. shall be paid by Shri Subhash Arora/his nominee aforesaid parties as also to Shri Sanjay Jain have been set out in the Settlement I ! Agreement. ; 3. Counsels for the parties state that after Shri Sanjay Jain receives a sum of ?5,01,00,000/- from Shri Subhash Arora, he would not be I left with any right, title or interest in the suit premises. Both the parties agree that due to bonafide inadvertence, a mention has been I made of adjustment of crores in sub-clause

(g) of para 13 of the Settlement Agreement, which is erroneous and ought to be deleted.

¶4for the parties further agree that none of them would ! have any objection if the sum of ?1,10,00,000/- that is lying deposited 1 In Court is released in favour of Smt. Saroj Singhari [plaintiff in CS(OS) 687/2010] through counsel. Further, at time of registration of the Sale Deed of the suit premises by Smt. Saroj Singhari and Shri Sandeep Bhav Singhari in favour of Shri Subhash i Arora or his nominee, they shall hand over vacant peaceful physical • possession of the suit premises in favour of Shri Subhash Arora or his nominee. The remaining terms and conditions have been detailed in para 13 of the Settlement ; CS(OS) 687/2010 & connected

¶5for jointly state that suit may be decreed in accordance with the terms and conditions as recorded in the Settlement Agreement dated 15.05.2013.

¶6The Court has perused the Settlement The same has been signed by all the present suits as also their respective counsels and the learned Mediator. In view of the fact that the parties state that they have arrived at the aforesaid settlement of their own free will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any quarters, there appears no legal impediment in accepting Settlement The Settlement Agreement dated 15.5.2013 is taken on record. The parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions of the settlement. The suit is decreed in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 15.05.2013.

¶7The plaintiff in CS(OS) 687/2010 shall be at liberty to approach the Registry for release of the sum of ?1,10,00,000/- deposited by her in the aforesaid suit, through counsel.

¶8It is further agreed by the parties that the status quo order passed on 16.04.2010 shall continue to operate till the terms and conditions have been acted upon by all the parties. CS(OS) 687/2010 & connected

¶9The suit is disposed of along with the pending applications, while leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

¶10At this stage, counsels for the jointly state that the plaintiffs in all the three suits may be granted refund of the court fees as issues have yet to be framed in the suits.

¶11In view of the submissions made by the counsels for the parties, the Registry is directed to issue a certificate for refund of the court fees to the plaintiffs in the respective suits under Section 16 of the Court Fees Act.

¶12File be consigned to the record room. MAY 21, 2013 rkb/sk CS(OS) 687/2010 & connected HIMA KOHLI, 3

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + + + CS(OS) 687/2010 & I.A.No.8560/2013 SAROJ SINGHARI Through: None versus Plaintiff SANJAY JAIN & ORS Defendants Through:'Mr. Arun Vohra, Advocate for D-1. Mr. A.K. Sharma, Advocate for D-2. Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Advocate with Ms. Pragya Singh and Mr.Harsh Sharma, Advs. for the applicants in I.A. No.16477/2011. AND CS(OS) 1346/2010 & LA.No.8562/2013 SANJAY JAIN Through: Mr. Arun Vohra, Advocate versus Plaintiff SAROJ SINGHARI & ANR Defendants Through: Mr. A.K. Sharma, Advocate for D-2. Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Advocate with Ms. Pragya Singh and Mr.Harsh Sharma, Advs. for the applicants in I.A.No.16475/2011. AND CS(OS) 140/2013 & LA.No.8577/2013 SUBHASH ARORA Plaintiff Through: Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Advocate with Ms. Pragya Singh and Mr.Harsh Sharma, Advs. versus SANJAY JAIN AND ORS Defendants Through: Mr. Arun Vohra, Advocate for D-1. Mr. A.K. Sharma, Advocate for D-2 and D-3. CS(OS) 687/2010 & connected Signed By:RAM DATT Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI