Full Text
25 and 26
% 12.09.2011
Present: None.
C.M. No.16999/2011 (Exemption) in RSA No.157/2011
C.M. No.17001/2011 (Exemption) in RSA No.158/2011
Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.
Applications stand disposed of.
+ RSA No.157/2011 and C.M. No.16998/2011 (stay)
RSA No.158/2011 and C.M. No.17000/2011 (stay)
JUDGMENT
1. These appeals have been passed over twice. Even on the third call, no one is appearing for the appellant. I have therefore perused the record and am proceeding to dispose of the appeals inasmuch as there is no need to summon the trial Court record.
2. The challenge by means of these appeals, is to the impugned order of the first Court dated 17.3.2008 and of the second Court dated 30.4.2011, and by which orders the Courts below have held that the appellant/defendant is bound by the settlement arrived at in writing before the Mediator and which settlement was duly signed by the parties. There is no dispute that there was in fact a settlement and as per the statements made before the Mediator, parties arrived at an agreed stand on 14.3.2008. Such statements, in writing and duly signed by the parties, amount to a compromise as envisaged under Order 23 Rule 3 of Code of RSA Nos.157/2011 & 158/2011 2011:DHC:18320 Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). Once the Mediator sent the report in the Court with respect to the settlement arrived at in writing and signed by the parties, it was not open for the appellant to resile from the same.
3. In view of the above, no substantial question of law arises. The appeals are without merits and are accordingly dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
SEPTEMBER 12, 2011 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. Ne