Bhai Sunder Das Sardar Singh P v. Bhai Balbir Singh & Anr

order. Renotify on 10.12.2010.

Dasti."

¶4The complaint of the Appellant No.3(b) is that despite an over-all settlement in which other heirs of the third appellant agreed to withdraw a pending partition suit, no such steps have been taken. The said appellant No.3(b) has consequently moved several applications, FAO(OS)83/2013 Page 11 i.e., 19933/2011, 15454/2012, 15456/2012 and 15958/2012 for various directions including appropriate directions to effectuate the settlement; for initiation of proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C. and for appointment of receiver in respect of late Shri Trilochan Singh Estate. It was contended by the counsel for the said appellant that this Court has to make a final order and consequently the other appellants 3(c) and 3(d) have to withdraw the pending partition suit CS(OS) 1698/2007. 5. Counsel for the other appellants, on the other hand, submit that this Court has not passed or indicated that a final order in terms of Rule 25 of Delhi Mediation Rules has been made or a decree in accordance with the procedure established by law is drawn. It is submitted that till such order is made, the question of withdrawing the partition suit does not arise.

¶6This Court is of the opinion that the settlement arrived at on 6th August, 2010 is lawful and binding upon those who were parties to it. Even though the Court exercises jurisdiction under Arbitration & Conciliation Act, the fact remains that the parties were referred to the Mediation Centre consequent to which a binding settlement was arrived at. It is not as if parties to the said settlement are questioning FAO(OS)83/2013 Page 12 its legality. In these circumstances, the Court is of the opinion that in view of the unanimity of the parties as to the binding nature of the settlement, the most appropriate course, which is prescribed by law, would be to require that the settlement is formally taken on record and a decree be directed to be drawn in accordance with law by the concerned learned Single Judge, who is seized of civil proceedings. Likewise, if the appellant No.3(b) or any of the parties to the settlement have any concern with regard to its effect or implementing the terms thereof, (which are to be embodied in terms of the decree to be drawn by the learned Single Judge), the same too would be dealt with and decided by the learned Single Judge in accordance with law.

¶7In view of the above discussion, the task of directing a formal order resulting in a decree would have to be necessarily exercised by the learned Single Judge.

¶8Learned counsel for the parties submitted that no formal dispute survives adjudication in the appeal FAO (OS) No. 83/2007. The same is accordingly disposed off. CM 16459/2012 (u/S.151 CPC for directions on behalf of appellant No.3(b) & 5914/2013(for release of rent deposit)

¶9Heard counsel for the parties. These applications seek suitable FAO(OS)83/2013 Page 13 directions from the Court for disbursement of certain amounts lying-in-deposit with the Registry. These pertain to disputes with regard to the shareholding in M/s. Bhai Sundar Das Sardar Singh Pvt. Ltd. Counsel for the appellant 3(b) and the respondents submit that the main dispute, which was part of the award, has since been settled. In terms of the settlement, the respondents would be entitled to 100% of the shareholding of the said Company. It is submitted that as far as the amounts are concerned, 74% of the said amounts have been disbursed to the other branches, which is not in dispute. As far as the balance amounts lying-in-deposit are concerned, the appellant No.3(b) would be entitled to half, i.e. 50% of the same (or 13.282%). As far as the residual amount after disbursement of 13.282% to the appellant 3(b) is concerned, the same would be decided in accordance with law.

¶10In the light of the above, it is hereby directed that the appellant 3(b) would be entitled to withdraw the amounts deposited by the respondents to the extent of his individual share holding, i.e. 13.282%. As far as the balance relating to the estate of Shri Trilochan Singh is concerned, the same would be decided in accordance with law by the FAO(OS)83/2013 Page 14 learned Single Judge who in terms of the previous portion of this order would be recording the formal decree and after hearing counsel for the parties proceeding to effectuate the terms of the settlement on deposit (together with interest accrued on it).

¶11The rents deposited by the respondents from time to time shall be released to them by the Registry along with accrued interest. CM 16459/2012 & 5914/2013 are disposed off in terms of this order.

¶12It is open to the parties to make such contentions as are available in law to them before the learned Single Judge.

¶13The appeal and applications are disposed off in terms of this order.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J (JUDGE)

NAJMI WAZIRI, J (JUDGE) JULY 9, 2013 'sn'

FAO(OS)83/2013 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON: 09th July, 2013 + FAO(OS) 83/2007 BHAI SUNDER DAS SARDAR SINGH PVT. LTD. ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv. for Appellant No.3(b). Dr. Arun Mohan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Arvind Bhatt, Mr. Kuber Giri, Adv. for Appellant 3(a). Mr. Sumit Bansal and Mr. Udit Gupta, Adv. for Appellant No.2. BHAI BALBIR SINGH & ANR ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI % MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) The appellant is aggrieved by an order made by the learned Single Judge disposing off objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 to an award. The parties to the arbitration agreement and consequently the award are family members. 2. The parties' inter se disputes pertained to extensive family properties, as well as closely held companies to which rival claims FAO(OS)83/2013 Page 2 were made by different branches of the family. During the pendency of the present appeal, the third appellant died. The disputes which arose between his heirs inter se were sought to be settled. The Court had suggested that the said dispute parties should approach Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre. Pursuant to this process on 6th August, 2010, an over-all mediation settlement was arrived at. Prior to this, i.e. on 5th August, 2010, this Court had called for the records of certain pending matters, i.e. two suits [CS(OS) 1698/2007, & CS(OS) 684/2008] and a Testamentary Case 2/2008 pending on the file of this Court. The settlement recorded on 6th August, 2010 between all heirs of the third appellant is extracted in full as under:- "SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT This SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT is entered into on 06.08.2010 BETWEEN Mrs. Indu Sabharwal W/o Late Bhai Tirlochan Singh R/o 9, Amrita Shergil Marg, New Delhi-110003, Ms. Nisha Singh D/o Late Bhai Tirlochan Singh R/o B-97, Neeti Bagh, Second Floor (Front Portion), New Delhi-110049 and Ms. Tara Sabharwal D/o Late Bhai Tirlochan Singh R/o A-17, Neeti Bagh, New Delhi-110049 AND Dr. Sabi Sabharwal S/o Late Bhai Tirlochan Singh, R/o 9, Amrita Shergil Marg, New Delhi- 110003. FAO(OS)83/2013 Page 3 WHEREAS 1. Disputes and differences had arisen between the Parties hereto and a FAO(OS) No. 83/2007 was filed before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. 2. The matter was referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre vide an order dated 05.08.2010 passed by a Division Bench comprising of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed and Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. K.Jain. 3. Ms. Sadhana Ramachandran, Advocate was appointed mediator by the Hon'ble Court and the parties agreed that she would act as Mediator for the parties in the matter of Mediation and Conciliation proceedings. 4. A meeting was held on 06.08.2010 with all the parties without their counsel and parties have, with the assistance of the Mediation/Conciliator, voluntarily arrived at an amicable solution resolving the above- mentioned disputes and differences. 5. Parties hereto also confirm and declare that they have respected and adhered to the spirit of mediation while arriving at the Settlement Agreement. 6. The following settlement has been arrived at between the parties hereto:- a) It is agreed between the parties that with regard to all the disputes and differences arising in the present case, they will, in principle, divide all the movable, company and FAO(OS)83/2013 Page 4 immovable properties as heirs of Bhai Trilochan Singh in the following manner:- i) Share of Dr. Sabi Sabharwal shall be 40% of the total movable company and immovable assets. ii) Share of Mrs. Indu Sabharwal shall be 20% of the total movable company and immovable assets. iii) Share of Ms. Nisha Singh shall be 20% of the total movable, company and immovable assets. iv) Share of Ms. Tara Sabharwal shall be 20% of the total movable, company and immovable assets. Immovable Properties b