IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Tarun Nandwani - Appellant
Versus
Ram Swarup Nandwani & Ors. - Respondents
Regular First Appeal No. 859 of 2010, Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 17781 of 2022
Decided On : 11-04-2022
Code of Civil Procedure - Family Settlement - Order XXIII Rule 3 - Suit 12/2008 - [Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order XXIII Rule 3] - The court discussed the oral Family Settlement dated 14th January, 2022, and its reduction in writing vide Memorandum dated 14th February, 2022. The settlement included terms regarding property ownership, joint ownership of shops, court applications, and cessation of further litigation. The court found that the dispute was amicably settled and decreed Suit No. 12/2008 in terms of the settlement agreement.
Fact of the Case:
The application sought decreeing of Suit 12/2008, which was earlier decreed in part in favor of the respondents by the impugned judgment dated 21st September, 2010. The dispute between the parties was amicably resolved through an oral Family Settlement dated 14th January, 2022, reduced in writing via a Memorandum dated 14th February, 2022.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dispute was amicably settled between the parties, and nothing survived for adjudication in the appeal. Suit No. 12/2008 was decreed in terms of the oral Family Settlement dated 14th January, 2022.
Issues: The main issue was the application seeking decreeing of Suit 12/2008, which was earlier decreed in part in favor of the respondents by the impugned judgment dated 21st September, 2010.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the amicable settlement between the parties, as evidenced by the oral Family Settlement dated 14th January, 2022, and its reduction in writing via a Memorandum dated 14th February, 2022.
Final Decision: The court decreed Suit No. 12/2008 in terms of the oral Family Settlement dated 14th January, 2022, and directed the Registry to draw up the decree sheet accordingly.
JUDGMENT
C. Hari Shankar, J. - CM aPPL. 17781/2022 in RFa 859/2010
1. This application, under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeks decreeing of Suit 12/2008, earlier decreed in part in favour of the respondents by the impugned judgment dated 21st September, 2010 of the learned additional District Judge ('the learned aDJ'), forming subject matter of challenge in the appeal.
2. The learned Counsel submit that the dispute between the parties stands amicably resolved vide an oral Family Settlement dated 14th January, 2022, which stands reduced in writing vide Memorandum dated 14th February, 2022.
3. a copy of the said memorandum of the oral Family Settlement dated 14th January, 2022 is placed on record along with this application.
4. Learned Counsel for the parties also submit that Respondent 1 has also challenged the impugned judgment dated 21st September, 2010 by way of RFa 13/2011, which has been admitted and is pending before a coordinate Bench of this Court. However, it is submitted that Respondent 1, as the appellant in that appeal, has expired.
5. Mr. arun Batta who represents the legal heirs of the deceased Respondent 1 in the said proceedings submits that that appeal has thus abated and they do not seek to move for revival of the appeal, as the disputes between the parties stand amicably resolved.
6. The terms of the settlement, as contained in the aforenoted memorandum of oral Family Settlement dated 14th January, 2022, are the following:
'1. The First Party will be exclusive and absolute owner of Property No.27, Sector-12a, Dwarka, New Delhi - 110075 and Second Party will not claim any right, title or interest therein;
2. The Second Party will be the exclusive and absolute owner of following properties and First Party will not claim any right, title or interest therein:
a. Property bearing No. a-2/175, First Floor, Janakpuri, New Delhi
b. Plot No. I-406, TOI, Kundli, KR2-1418, Delhi
3. That both the Parties (First Party and Second Party) will jointly and in equal share own six shops being Nos.301, 301B, 302, 303, 304 and 307 situated at C-l, LSC, Janakpuri, New Delhi and they shall jointly let out and or sell out the same as per mutual discussions and agreements. The rent received on letting out and/or sale proceeds received on sale of the said six shops shall be shared equally between the parties.
4. The Parties sha1l move joint/compromise application before the Hon'ble High Court in Regular First appeal No.859/2010 for passing of compromise decree in term of/ to give effect to the present settlement.
5. That the Second Party will give no objection (in whatever form required) for the lease of rent qua Property No.27, Sector-12a, Dwarka, New Delhi lying deposited with the bank in the form of FDR in terms of order mentioned hereinabove to and/in favour of First Party, which has deposited in term of order dated 23.03.2010 passed by the Court of Sh. arun Bhardwaj, aDJ, Dwarka in Suit No. 12/2009 (now numbered as Misc. DJ aDJ No. 15209/16 and presided over by Sh. Sachin Jain aDJ-02, South West, Dwarka Courts Delhi). The First Party shall be entitled to withdraw all the said amounts and the Second Party shall not claim any right therein.
6. The parties to the present agreement will not claim any rent, damages, use and occupation charges, if any, received by either of them or by their parents or grand-mother, from any of the properties prior to the execution of the present Family Settlement.
7. The Parties undertake to execute all the necessary documents including making applications to the Hon'ble Court to give proper effect to this settlement.
8. The parties undertake to sign, execute and register all necessary documents, if required, in-favour of each other, for transfer of properties in their respective names, in accordance with the present settlement. However, the expenses for such registration such as lawyer's fee, stamp duty, registration charges etc. shall be borne by the party in whose favour such docu
The main legal point established in the judgment is the enforceability of an oral Family Settlement, reduced in writing, under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
A family settlement can resolve disputes amicably and be deemed enforceable when reduced to writing and agreed upon by all parties involved.
Amicable family settlements can validly resolve disputes regarding property rights when formally agreed upon and will be recognized by the court as lawful.
The validity and lawfulness of a Memorandum of Family Settlement in resolving property disputes.
The family settlement, though unregistered, operated as estoppel against the signatories and partitioned the suit properties among the plaintiff and Defendants 1 to 3. The plaintiff was estopped from....
The court has the authority to pass a decree in terms of a compromise deed under the relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and can order the refund of court fees in accordance wit....
Specific remedies are available to challenge a decree, and the petitioner cannot bypass such remedies and invoke the jurisdiction of the court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
The court has the discretion to permit parties to settle their disputes in the interest of justice, and a compromise/settlement agreement can be allowed if found to be legal.
The petitioner must follow statutory remedies for challenging an ex parte decree, bypassing established procedures is impermissible under the Code of Civil Procedure.
Oral family settlements are valid and require no registration if acknowledged by all parties, and prior admissions bind parties in subsequent related suits.
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.