Harvinder Singh Chhabra v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr

1. The parties have jointly filed this application under order 23 Rule 3 CPC placing the settlement arrived at between them on record. The petitioner, defendant no.2 and defendant no.3 are present in person and their statements have been recorded separately. >j 2. During the pendency of the instant probate petition, the parties have arrived at a settlement which has been reduced to writing by way of a Settlement Agreement dated 6'^ August, 2011 (Ex.P-lll) on record. The same has been filed alongwith joint application being lA no.12595/2011 (Exh.P-l) by the parties.

3. A prayer is made by the parties that this petition be disposed of in terms of settlement agreement dated 6'^ August, 2011. S' 2011:DHC:1916[9]: 2:

4. Even though the provisions of Order 23 Rule 3 CPC do not strictly apply to a case seeking probate of a Will under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. However, perusal of the Settlement Agreement placed by the parties alongwith lA no.12595/2011 and the Settlement Agreement would show that the respondents have abandoned all objections to the Will dated 22"^ February, 2011 executed by late Shri Ajit Singh. • The parties have also agreed that they would not act upon the said Will and have entered into an agreement with regard to settlement of their all disputes. The parties have agreed to remain bound by the terms pf the settlement agreement, which undertakings are hereby accepted.

5. The settlement between the parties is in writing and signed by them. It appears to be voluntary, bonafide and entered into without any kind of force, pressure, coercion or undue influence. In view of the settlement, the parties do not wish to press for the probate petition and pray that this probate petition be disposed of in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 6'^ August, 2011 (Ex.P-lll).

6. Accordingly, the settlement between the parties is taken on record. The parties shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement and the undertaking.

7. Test Case no.54/2009 & lA no.12595/2011 are disposed of in terms of the settlement.: 3; lA no,13900/2009 8, In view of the settlement between the parties, this application does not survive and is disposed of as such. (mTA MITTALJ AUGUST 10, 2011(rds) ij rds r 1-33 * IN THE fflGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + TEST.CAS. 54/2009 HARVINDER SINGH CHHABRA Petitioner Through: Mr. Dinesh K. Chawla, Advocate.

VERSUS

JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL ORDER % 12.01.2012 lA No. 149/2012 (u/s 151 CPC by respondent No.3 for correction in the order dated 10.08.2011) Notice. Mr. Dinesh K. Chawla, the learned counsel for the petitioner accepts notice. This is an application for correction of the date in the order dated 10.08.2011, v^herein in paragraph 4, the date of the 'Will' has been wrongly typed as 22.02.2011 instead of 22.02.2007 on account of a typographical mistake. The counsel for the petitioner states that he has no objection if the aforesaid correction is made. The prayer in the application is accordingly allowed. The application stands disposed of. ^ REVA KHETRAPAL, J. JANUARY 12,2012 sk