Back
154 (2008) DELHI LAW TIMES 598
DELHI HIGH COURT
A.K. Sikri, J.
SURINDER KAUR & ORS. -Plaintiffs
Versus
PRITAM SINGH & ORS. -Defendants
CS (OS) No. 656 of 2003
Decided on : 20.12.2005
Mediation - Property Partition - Mediation and Conciliation Rules, 2004 - Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure - Order 23, Rule 3 - Settlement Agreement - Court to fix a date for recording settlement and passing decree
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiffs filed a suit for partition of a property. The parties reached an amicable settlement through mediation, but certain payments and obligations were not fulfilled as per the settlement terms.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the parties had entered into a settlement agreement through mediation, and the court was satisfied that the parties had compromised the suit as per the terms contained in the settlement before the mediator.
Issues: Non-fulfillment of payments and obligations as per the settlement terms.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Mediation and Conciliation Rules, 2004, Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and Order 23, Rule 3 to pass a decree in terms of the settlement agreement reached through mediation.
Final Decision: The suit was decreed in terms of the settlement agreement reached through mediation.
A.K. Sikri, J. (Oral)-The parties are related to each other. The plaintiffs have filed the suit for partition of a property bearing No. C-82, Old Vishnu Garden. The defendants 2 to 5 did not appear and were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 4th May, 2004. However, keeping in view the fact that it was a family dispute, it was deemed proper to send the matter for mediation in order to explore the possibility of settlement. Thus vide order dated 4 May, 2004, Dr. Sudhir Kumar Jain, Additional Director, Delhi Judicial Academy, Karkardoom Court Complex who is also Additional District Judge, Delhi was appointed as the mediator in the case and it was directed that the parties shall appear before him on 5th May, 2004. All the parties appeared before the mediator including the defendants 2 to 5 though they were proceeded ex parte in these proceedings.
2. After protracted negotiations and due to the intervention/mediation of Dr. Sudhir Kumar Jain, the parties were able to arrive at amicable settlement. The terms of this settlement are mentioned by the learned mediator in his report dated 28th August, 2004 forwarded by him to this Court. Along with the report, proceedings held by him on various dates are also filed. Last meeting of the parties took place on 27th August, 2004 wherein the agreed terms of settlement were recorded. As per these terms, the dispute between the parties has been settled in the following manner:
(i) The property bearing No. C-82, situated at Old Vishnu Garden, New Delhi shall be partitioned between Sh. Hardayal Singh and Sh. Prem Singh in equal proportion. Sh. Prem Singh shall retain the portion situated towards the property No. C-83, while, Hardayal Singh shall retain the portion situated towards the property No. C-81. Both Hardayal Singh and Prem Singh have agreed to partition the property themselves without the intervention of other persons /brothers.
(ii) The property No. C-82 is also under the occupation of plaintiffs Surender Kaur and Mr. Harjinder Singh and Sh. Harpal Singh. They shall vacate the portion of the property bearing No. C-82, under their possession, use and occupation on or before 31.3.2005.
(iii) Sh. Harpal Singh and Sh. Hardayal Singh also mutually agreed upon that Sh. Hardayal Singh shall hand over the possession of the ground floor of the portion of his share/ property towards the property No. C-81, to Sh. Harpal Singh after partition of the property. In lieu of this, Sh. Harpal Singh shall pay a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs Fifty Thousand) to Sh. Hardayal Singh. Both of them further agreed that it shall be done before 31.3.2005.
(iv) There are two shops in the property bearing No. WZ-66, Meenakshi Garden, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi. At present one shop is in the possession of Harpal Singh. Sh. Harpal Singh shall retain the said shop along with the terrace.
(v) That Sewa Singh shall be given another shop situated towards the main Road by Sh. Pritam Singh along with terrace. Sh. Sew a Singh shall be put into the possession of the said shop by Sh. Pritam Singh by on or before 31.3.2005.
(vi) Sh. Pritam Singh shall retain remaining portion open as well as constructed of property bearing No. WZ-66, Meenakshi Garden (except two shops with terrace) as his share in properties in question. The terrace also shall be in share of Sh. Pritam Singh.
(vii) The plaintiff Surender Kaur along with plaintiff Harjinder Singh has agreed to vacate the portion forming part of the property bearing No. C-82, Old Vishnu Garden, under her occupation on or before 31.3.2005 and in lieu of this plaintiffs shall be given a sum of Rs. 6,00.000/ - (Rupees Six Lacs) by Sh. Pritam Singh on or before 31.3.2005.
(viii) The plaintiff Surender Kaur and defendants 5/Sh. Pritam Singh, Sewa Singh, Hardayal Singh and Prem Singh each also agreed to give Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees Forty thousand) total amounting to Rs. 2,00,0001- (Rupees Two Lacs) to Sh. Harpal Singh on or before 31.3.2005.
(ix) All the parties have agreed to work
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
