M/SPARLE AGROPVTLTD & ANR v. SIMPA FOOD INDIA

1. A settlement agreement dated 27^^ July, 2011 entered into between the parties has been plaeed on record.

2. Learned counsel for the plaintiffidentifies the signatures ofthe Authorized Representatives ofthe plaintiffon the settlement agreement.

3. Mi-.Anuj Soni,learned counsel for the defendant identifies the signatures of Mi-.Harvinder Singh, sole proprietor ofthe defendant company on the settlement agreement.

4. It is prayed that in view ofthe terms and conditions set out in para 6(a)to (e)the suit ofthe plaintiffbe decreed.

5. The settlement ofthe parties is in writing and appears to be voluntary and without any force, pressure or coercion. There is no legal impediment in taking the same on record and disposing ofthe suit in terms ofpara6(a)to(e). 2011:DHC:15266 n

6. The defendants have given an undertaking in the agreement dated 2?"' July, 2011 and shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement contained therein.

7. In view ofthe above,no issue remains to be adjudicated in the present case and it is appropriate thatthe suit be disposed of.

8. Learned counsel for the parties state that in clause 6(d)ofthe agreement it has been erroneously recorded that suit is required to be withdrawn, whereas in -..-^dew ofthe undertaking given bythe defendant,asrecorded in para6(a)to(e),the ~wrsuit has to be decreed.

9. In view ofthe above,it is directed as follows

(i) The settlement agreement dated 2?"' July, 2011, entered into between the parties,is accepted.

(ii) The undertaking given by the defendant is accepted and he shall remain bound by the same.

(iii) The suit is decreed in terms of para 6 (a) to (e) contained in the agreement dated 27^''July, 2011. The same shall form part ofthe decree.

(iv) The Registry shall issue a certificate in the prescribed format which would enable the plaintiffto get refund ofthe 50% ofthe court fees in aecordarice with law as per amended Section 16 ofthe Court Fees Act. X-ALL- GMTA MITTAfer^