Full Text
Translation output
J*-
$-3 •
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
FAO(OS) 520-22/2011 & CM No. 19668/2011 & CM No.488/2012
MONSANTO HOLDINGS PVT LTD Appellant
Through: Mr Pravin Anand and Ms T.
Sankshmya, Advocate.
$-3 •
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
FAO(OS) 520-22/2011 & CM No. 19668/2011 & CM No.488/2012
MONSANTO HOLDINGS PVT LTD Appellant
Through: Mr Pravin Anand and Ms T.
Sankshmya, Advocate.
VERSUS
SHAILENDRA SHIVAM & ORS Respondents
Through
Through
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
29.10.2013 This appeal had been referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation and
Conciliation Centre for a possible settlement. We have now received a
Settlement Agreement dated 07.10.2013 from the said Centre indicating that the parties have settled their disputes and differences. The parties have settisd the said disputes and differences as per the terms and conditions referred to in paragraph 6 of the Settlement Agreement, which is on record.
As indicated in paragraph 7 of the Settlement Agreement, the parties have agreed that they have no further claims or demands against each other and all the disputes and differences between the parties have been amicably settled through the process of mediation. The parties have also undertaken to abide by the tenns and conditions set out in the above Settlement
Agreement and not to raise any dispute in respect ofthe same in future.
We are informed by the learned counsel' for the appellant that respondent no.6 was proceeded ex parte before the learned Single Judge and
2013:DHC:6920-DB - A has also chosen not to appear in the present proceedings.
The Settlement Agreement is taken on record. We find that the settlement is in accordance with law and, therefore, the appeal, cross objections and also the pending applications are disposed of in terms of the settlement.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J VIBHU BAKHRU, J OCTOBER 29, 2013
MK
2013:DHC:6920-DB
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
29.10.2013 This appeal had been referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation and
Conciliation Centre for a possible settlement. We have now received a
Settlement Agreement dated 07.10.2013 from the said Centre indicating that the parties have settled their disputes and differences. The parties have settisd the said disputes and differences as per the terms and conditions referred to in paragraph 6 of the Settlement Agreement, which is on record.
As indicated in paragraph 7 of the Settlement Agreement, the parties have agreed that they have no further claims or demands against each other and all the disputes and differences between the parties have been amicably settled through the process of mediation. The parties have also undertaken to abide by the tenns and conditions set out in the above Settlement
Agreement and not to raise any dispute in respect ofthe same in future.
We are informed by the learned counsel' for the appellant that respondent no.6 was proceeded ex parte before the learned Single Judge and
2013:DHC:6920-DB - A has also chosen not to appear in the present proceedings.
The Settlement Agreement is taken on record. We find that the settlement is in accordance with law and, therefore, the appeal, cross objections and also the pending applications are disposed of in terms of the settlement.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J VIBHU BAKHRU, J OCTOBER 29, 2013
MK
2013:DHC:6920-DB
JUDGMENT