Full Text
CS(OS) No. 1499/2011 AUTODESK INDIA PVY LTD & ORS Plaintiff
Through Mr. Nischal Anand, Adv.
Through Ms. Shiva Lakshmi Singh, Adv.
13.09.2011 lA No.14273/2011 (Under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC)
ORDER
1. This application has been jointly filed by the plaintiffs and defendant no.4 under Order 23 Rule 3 of the CPC placing a settlement arrived at between them on record.
2. On behalf of the plaintiffs, the application is signed by ^Mr. Achutan Sreekumar, constituted attorney of the plaintiffs. On behalf of the defendants, the application is signed by Mr. Yogesh P. Arbal, defendant no.l and Mr. Sanjay B. Jani, authorized representative of the defendant nos.[2] & 3. Learned counsel for the parties have identified the signatures of Mr. Achutan Sreekumar; Mr. Yogesh P. Arbal & Mr.Sanjay B. Jani respectively on the application and the affidavits in support. 2011:DHC:15533 -2 -
3. The terms of settlement between the parties have been set out in paras 1 to 8 of the application.
4. The parties have given undertakings in the application to remain bound by the terms of the settlement.
5. Perusal of the application and the affidavits would show that the settlement between the parties is in writing and appears to be voluntary, bona fide and entered into without any kind of force, pressure or undue influence. There is no legal impediment for taking the same ^ on record.
6. A prayer is made on behalf of both parties that the suit of the plaintiffs be decreed on terms detailed in para 1 to 8 of the application.
7. In view of the above, it is directed as follows:-
(i) The settlement between the parties detailed in para 1 to 8 of this application is accepted and taken on record.
(ii) The undertakings given by the parties are accepted. The defendants shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement and undertaking given to this court.
(iii) This application is allowed in the above terms.
8. In view of the settlement between the plaintiffs and defendant nos.[2] & 3 and the prayers made in lA No.14273/2011, which has been allowed today, it is directed that the suit as against the defendant nos.[2] If \ - 3 - |V.tJ-'- — & 3 shall stand decreed on terms and conditions set out in para 1 to 8 of the application which shall form part of the decree.
9. The parties shall remain bound by their undertakings and terms of settlement.
10. The decree in terms of the above shall be drawn up by the Registry.
11. Learned counsel for the defendants has handed over a bank draft > in the sum of Rs.20,00,000/- to the plaintiffs in terms ofthe settlement.
12. In view of the settlement, the superdarinama executed by the defendants in terms of the order dated 3'^'' June, 2011, shall stand discharged.
13. The plaintiffs shall ensure that the license software which has been ordered by the defendants in terms of the settlement, shall be delivered to the defendants expeditiously, in any case within a period of two weeks from today. lA No.9803/2011
14. In view of the suit having been decreed, this application does not survive for adjudication and is disposed of. GIT^ MJJTAirn' SEPTEMBER 13, 2011 aa 1-45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1499/2011 AUTODESK INDIA PVT LTD & ORS Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Vaishali Mittal and Ms. Abhilasha Nautiyal, Advocates versus YOGESH ARBAL & ORS Defendants Through: Ms. ShivaLakshmi, Advocates for the defendants No.l to 3 CORAM: HON'BLE MS.
JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL ORDER % 17.10.2011 lA No. 16647/2011 (for corrcction of order dated 13.09.2011) Tliis is anapplication filed by the defendants No.l to 3 for correction of certain typographical errors which have crept inthe order dated September 13, 2011 as detailed inparagraphs No.2 to 6 ofthepresent application. Notice. Ms. Vaishali Mittal, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the plaintiffs and states that in view of the fact that the said errors are typographical mistakes, she does not oppose the application. The prayer for correction of the errors in order dated September 13, 2011 is accordingly allowed. The corrected order shall now read as follows: "IA No.14273/2011 (Under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC)
1. This application has beenjointlyfiled by the CS(OS) 1499/2011 Page 7 of[3] plaintiffs and defendants No.l to 3 under Order 23 Rule 3 of the CPCplacing a settlement arrived at between them on record.
2. On behalfofthe plaintiffs, the application is signed by Mr. Achutan Sreekumar, constituted attorney of the plaintiffs. On behalfof the defendants, the application is signed by Mr. Yogesh P. Arbal, defendant no.l and Mr. Sanjay B. Jani, authorized representative ofthe defendant nos.[2] & 3. Learned counselfor theparties have identified the signatures ofMr. Achutan Sreekumar; Mr. Yogesh P. Arbal & Mr.Sanjay B. Jani respectively on the application and the affidavits in support.
3. The terms of settlement between the parties have been set out inparas 1 to 11 of the application.
4. The parties have given undertakings in the application to remain bound by the terms of the settlement.
5. Perusal ofthe application and the affidavits would show that the settlement between the parties is in writing and appears to be voluntary, bona fide and entered into without any kind offorce, pressure or undue influence. There is no legal impediment for taking the same on record.
6. Aprayer is made on behalfofboth parties that the suit ofthe plaintiffs be decreed on terms detailed in para 1 to 11 ofthe application.
7. In view, ofthe above, it isdirected asfollows
(i) The settlement between the parties detailed in para
(ii) The undertakings given by the parties are accepted.
The defendants shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement and undertaking given to this court. (Hi) This application is allowed in the above terms. CS (OS) No.1499/2011
8. In view ofthe settlement between the plaintiffs and defendant nos.[1] to 3 and the prayers made in lA No.14273/2011, which has been allowed today, it is directed that the suit as against the defendant nos. 1 to 3 shall stand decreed on terms and conditions set out in para 1 to 11 ofthe application which shallform part of the decree. CS(OS) 1499/2011 2of[3] •X >
9. The parties shall remain bound by their undertakings and terms ofsettlement.
10. The decree in terms ofthe above shall be drawn up by the Registry.
11. Learned counsel for the defendants has handed over a bank draft in the sum of Rs.20,00,000/- to the plaintiffs in terms ofthe settlement.
12. In view of the settlement, the superdarinama executed by the defendants in terms ofthe order dated 3'^'' June, 2011, shall stand discharged.
13. The plaintiffs shall ensure that the license software which has been ordered by the defendants in terms of the settlement, shall be delivered to the defendants expeditiously, in any case within a period of two weeks from today. lA No.9803/2011
14. In view of the suit having been decreed, this application does not survive for adjudication and is disposed of. " The application stands disposed of accordingly. U REVA KHETRAPAL, J OCTOBER 17, 2011 km CSrOS) 1499/2011 Pase 3 of[3] V