Neelam Azad v. Om Dutt Kardam and Others

1. The case was passed over on the first call as none was present on behalf of the plaintiff. Same is the position even on the second call.

2. On the last date of hearing, counsel for the defendants No.1 & 2 had entered appearance and stated that the parties had arrived at a settlement in the Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre in a suit instituted by his clients against the plaintiff wherein, a prayer was made for cancellation of the sale deed in respect of the suit premises. The court was also informed that the settlement had been duly accepted. As none was present on behalf of the plaintiff on the last date of hearing, counsel for the defendants No.1 & 2 was directed to 2015:DHC:5664 CS(OS) 1682/2012 give a written intimation of the next date of hearing to the counsel for the plaintiff and place on record proof of intimation. Further, counsel for the defendants No.1 & 2 was directed to hand over to the court, a copy of the order passed in the connected suit along with a copy of the settlement arrived at during the mediation.

3. None is present on behalf of the plaintiff today, nor was the plaintiff represented through counsel before the Joint Registrar on 20.3.2015. It is therefore assumed that the plaintiff does not wish to pursue the present suit any further. The suit is dismissed in default and for non-prosecution, along with pending application. The date of 15.9.2015, fixed before the Joint Registrar stands cancelled. HIMA KOHLI, J JULY 16, 2015 mk