Full Text
Translation output
r 1- 9&10 HIGH COURT OF DELHI 9.
CS(OS) 2981/2012
CAPTAIN ASfflSH BERRY Plaintiff
Through: Mi*. Jasmeet Singh, Advocate with Mr. Saurabh Tiwari, Advocate.
CS(OS) 2981/2012
CAPTAIN ASfflSH BERRY Plaintiff
Through: Mi*. Jasmeet Singh, Advocate with Mr. Saurabh Tiwari, Advocate.
VERSUS
THE KINGFISHER AIRLINES LTD Defendant
Through: Ms. Priyambada Mishra, Advocate.
And 10.
Through: Ms. Priyambada Mishra, Advocate.
And 10.
CS(OS) 2983/2012
CAPTAIN RISHI RAJ CHATTERJEE Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Jasmeet Singh, Advocate with Mr. Saurabh Tiwari, Advocate.
CAPTAIN RISHI RAJ CHATTERJEE Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Jasmeet Singh, Advocate with Mr. Saurabh Tiwari, Advocate.
VERSUS
THE KINFISHER AIRLINES LTD ..... Defendant
Through: Ms. Priyambada Mishra, Advocate.
Through: Ms. Priyambada Mishra, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
17.05.2013
17.05.2013
LA. 1307/2013 in CSrOS^ 2981/2013
LA. 1308/20L3 in CS(OS) 2983/2013 Today, learned counsel for parties have handed over in Court the
Settlement Agreements dated 04'*^ April, 2013. The same are taken on record.
CS(OS) Nos. 2981/2012 &2983/2012 P^Se 1of3.
2013:DHC:6710 Present two suits have been filed for recovery under Order XXXVII
CPC.
On 28^ January, 2013, with consent of parties, present suits were referredto the Delhi High CourtMediationand ConciliationCentre.
Mediation in present cases has beensuccessful through the efforts of Mr. Mohd. Anis Ur Rehman, Advocate-Mediator.
The Settlement Agreements dated 04^*^ April, 2013 have been executed between the parties in both the suits.
This Court is satisfied that the compromise between the parties contained in the aforesaid SettlementAgreements satisfies the requirements of
Order 23 Rule 3 CPC. The compromise contained in the aforesaid Settlement
Agreements is lawful and therefore, this Court does notfmd any impediment in decreeing the suits in terms ofthe aforesaid Settlement Agreements.
It is pertinent to mention that the Supreme Court in Afcons
Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Cherian Varkey Construction Co. (P) Ltd., (2010) 8 see 24 while dealing with Section 89 of the CPC observed that the settlement agreement will have to be placed before the Court for recording it and disposing of the suit in its terms and the Court should apply the principle of
Order 23 Rule 3 of the CPC and make a decree in terms of the settlement m regard to the subject matter ofthe suit, to make such settlement effective.
Consequently, present suits are decreed in terms of aforesaid Settlement
Agreements dated 04^'' April, 2013. Registry is directed to prepare decree sheets in terms thereof
CS(OS) Nos. 2981/2012 &2983/2012 page2of3.
Since the present cases have been settled before the Delhi High Court and Mediation Centre prior to the issues being framed, Registry is directed to issue certificates authorising the plaintiffs to receive back from the Collector the full amount of Court-fee paidbythemin respect of the present two suits.
With the aforesaid observations, present applications are allowed and suits andpendingapplications are disposed of.
The next date ofhearing i.e. 12^^ August, 2013 iscancelled.
MANMOHAN, J MAY 17, 2013 js CS(OS) Nos. 2981/2012 &2983/2012 page 3of3.
LA. 1308/20L3 in CS(OS) 2983/2013 Today, learned counsel for parties have handed over in Court the
Settlement Agreements dated 04'*^ April, 2013. The same are taken on record.
CS(OS) Nos. 2981/2012 &2983/2012 P^Se 1of3.
2013:DHC:6710 Present two suits have been filed for recovery under Order XXXVII
CPC.
On 28^ January, 2013, with consent of parties, present suits were referredto the Delhi High CourtMediationand ConciliationCentre.
Mediation in present cases has beensuccessful through the efforts of Mr. Mohd. Anis Ur Rehman, Advocate-Mediator.
The Settlement Agreements dated 04^*^ April, 2013 have been executed between the parties in both the suits.
This Court is satisfied that the compromise between the parties contained in the aforesaid SettlementAgreements satisfies the requirements of
Order 23 Rule 3 CPC. The compromise contained in the aforesaid Settlement
Agreements is lawful and therefore, this Court does notfmd any impediment in decreeing the suits in terms ofthe aforesaid Settlement Agreements.
It is pertinent to mention that the Supreme Court in Afcons
Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Cherian Varkey Construction Co. (P) Ltd., (2010) 8 see 24 while dealing with Section 89 of the CPC observed that the settlement agreement will have to be placed before the Court for recording it and disposing of the suit in its terms and the Court should apply the principle of
Order 23 Rule 3 of the CPC and make a decree in terms of the settlement m regard to the subject matter ofthe suit, to make such settlement effective.
Consequently, present suits are decreed in terms of aforesaid Settlement
Agreements dated 04^'' April, 2013. Registry is directed to prepare decree sheets in terms thereof
CS(OS) Nos. 2981/2012 &2983/2012 page2of3.
Since the present cases have been settled before the Delhi High Court and Mediation Centre prior to the issues being framed, Registry is directed to issue certificates authorising the plaintiffs to receive back from the Collector the full amount of Court-fee paidbythemin respect of the present two suits.
With the aforesaid observations, present applications are allowed and suits andpendingapplications are disposed of.
The next date ofhearing i.e. 12^^ August, 2013 iscancelled.
MANMOHAN, J MAY 17, 2013 js CS(OS) Nos. 2981/2012 &2983/2012 page 3of3.
JUDGMENT