SANJEEV SACHDEVA
Anil Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. - Cm APPL.25330/2021 & FAO 189/2016
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. This is an application on behalf of the appellant under Order XIII Rule 3 CPC seeking to place on record a settlement between the appellant and respondent with regard to the award passed by the Arbitral Tribunal.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has paid a sum of Rs.35,000/- in full and final settlement of the subject loan account with the respondent. Learned counsel submits that on payment of the said amount, nothing is further due from the appellant.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the respondent be also directed to furnish a no objection certificate.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent also confirms that full and final settlement amount has been paid by the appellant and now there is nothing recoverable from the appellant with regard to the subject loan account and the award.
6. Appellant had taken a personal loan from the respondent in the sum of Rs.10 lakhs. There were certain disputes which were referred to the Arbitral Tribunal. Arbitral Tribunal passed an award against the appellant on 19.10.2012. Objections a
The court recognized and gave effect to the full and final settlement between the parties, leading to the satisfaction of the arbitral award and disposal of the appeal.
A settlement reached between parties renders an arbitral award satisfied, making any appeals regarding the matter infructuous.
Appointment of a receiver under arbitration law requires prior notice; subsequent settlement of disputes negates the need for such measures.
The court recognizes and upholds the mutual settlement reached between parties regarding the execution of an arbitral award, directing compliance within a specified timeframe.
Mutual agreement leading to settlement can effectively resolve appeals in motor accident claims.
The court recognized the binding nature of the settlement agreement between the parties and dismissed the petition as the dispute was resolved.
Court emphasizes the importance of preserving parties' rights while allowing for settlement negotiations under arbitration law.
The court considered the acceptance of payment without prejudice to further claims, and the referral to mediation as a means to resolve the disputes.
Writ petition closed upon full settlement of loan account by parties.
The court upheld the terms of settlement and directed the Trial Court to consider the provisions of Section 16 of the Court Fee Act, 1970.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.