Sunita Garg v. Pawan Chaudhary

Delhi High Court · 28 Oct 2013 · 2013:DHC:8545
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw
RFA 120/2012, RFA 156/2012 & RFA 160/2012
2013:DHC:8545
civil appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court disposed of three civil appeals as compromised, recording the decree as satisfied and ordering refund of the deposited amount with interest.

Full Text
Translation output
i I $-21.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
RFA 120/2012
SUNITA GARG Appellant
Through: Mr. Hitendra Kumar, Adv.
VERSUS
PAWAN CHAUDHARY Respondent
Through: Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. along with respondent in person.
AND
22.
RFA 156/2012
PAWAN CHAUDHARY Appellant
Through: Mr, Ankit Agaiwal, Adv. along with appellant in person.
VERSUS
SUNITA GARG Respondent Thfough: Mr. Hitendra Kumar, Adv.
AND
23.
-I- RFA 160/2012 PAWAN CHAUDHARY Appellant
Through: Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. along with appellant in person.
VERSUS
SUNITA GARG Respondent
Through: Mr. Hitendra Kumar, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
28.10.2013
RFA 120/2012, RFA 156/2012 & RFA 160/2012 page 1 of3
2013:DHC:8545 if CM No.16987/2013 in RFA No.120/2012, CM No.16988/2013 in RFA
No.156/2012 & CM No.16989/2013 in RFA No.160/2012 (all u/O 23 R-1
CPC).
ORDER

1. All the three appeals arise out ofthe samejudgment and decree dated 19^'' September, 2011 ofthe Court ofthe Addl. District Judge - Central, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi in the suit No.334/2009 filed by Ms. Sunita Garg for recovery of Rs.3,49,804/- and the counter claim filed by Shri Pawan Chaudhary for recovery of Rs. 1,43,000/-.

2. The appeals were admitted for hearing and Shri Pawan Chaudhary directed to deposit the decretal amount in this Court as a condition for stay.

3. The parties are now stated to have compromised all their disputes and differences on the terms that the monies deposited by Shri Pawan Chaudhary in this Court together with interest accrued thereon be refunded to Shii Pawan Chaudhary and the decree be recorded as satisfied.

4. The applications though titled under Order 23 Rule 1 are in fact under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC and are signed by both parties and their Advocates and also accompanied by the affidavits ofboth paities.

5. The counsels in Court support the applications and the counsel for Shri Pawan Chaudhary states that Shri Pawan Chaudhary is also present in the Court today.

6. Though the parties aie not disclosing the other terms of their settlement, but the compromise is found to be lawful. RFA 120/2012, RFA 156/2012 & RFA 160/2012 page 2 of[3]

7. The appeals are disposed of as compromised recording that the decree impugned in these appeals stands satisfied and shall no longer be executable and the monies deposited in this Court by Shri Pawan Chaudhary be reiiinded to Shri Pawan Chaudhary together with interest accrued thereon, and leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Decree sheet be drawn up. lJIV sahai endlaw, j OCTOBER 28, 2013 pp.. RFA 120/2012, RFA 156/2012 & RFA 160/2012 page 3 of[3]