Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 3003

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J.
Harleen Anand – Appellant
Versus
Bhai Sardar Singh Deceased Through Lrs & Ors. – Respondents
CM(M) 435 of 2022 & CM Appl. 22502 of 2022, CM Appl. 22503 of 2022, CM Appl. 27684 of 2022, CM Appl. 17720 of 2023 and CM Appl. 37291 of 2023 and CM(M) 481 of 2023 & CAV 151 of 2023, CAV 152 of 2023 CM Appl. 14389 of 2023, CM Appl. 14390 of 2023 and CM Appl. 37277 of 2023
Decided On : 27-07-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Jeevesh Nagrath, Mr. Arjun Gaur, Mr. Rajat Gupta, Advocates along with Petitioner in person.
Mr. Gaurav Duggal, Advocate, for R-3 (ii).
Mr. Humraz bir Singh, Advocate, for R-2 (i).
Mr. Ramesh Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Akshay Ringe, Advocate, for R-4(i) to 4 (iv).
Mr. Rishabh Bansal and Mr. Daksha Aroa, Advocate, for R-2 (ii).
Mr. Gaurav Duggal, Advocate, for R-3(ii) and (iii).
Mr. Arjun Nanda and Mr. Dhruv Wadhwa, Advocate, for R-2 (iii).
Mr. Ramesh Singh, Senior Advocate with Ms. Megha Mukerjeet, Advocate, for R-4 (i) to (v).
Mr. Pawanjit Singh Bindra, Senior Advocate with Lakshay Dhamija, Advocate, for Defendant No. 1.
Mr. Sujoy Chatterjee, Advocate, for R-7.

Parties can voluntarily arrive at a settlement even if they are not parties to the civil suit, and a valid Settlement Agreement will be binding on the parties.

Headnote:
Settlement Agreement - Civil Suit - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order XXIII Rule 3, Order XXIII Rule 1, Section 151 - Family Settlement Agreement dated 17.07.2023
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the Trial Court in a Civil Suit. The petitioner and the Settling Respondents filed applications under the Code of Civil Procedure for recording a Family Settlement Agreement dated 17.07.2023.
Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the Settlement Agreement between the Petitioner and the Settling Respondents was lawful and allowed the application, directing the parties to remain bound by the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
Issues: Impleadment in the civil suit, validity of the Settlement Agreement, rights of the LRs of Respondent No. 4
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the parties were not precluded from voluntarily arriving at a settlement, even if they were not parties to the civil suit. The Court also found that the Settlement Agreement did not impinge upon the rights of the LRs of Respondent No. 4.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the application, recorded the Family Settlement Agreement, and directed the parties to remain bound by its terms. The petitioner was permitted to withdraw the petition against the non-settling Respondents.

JUDGMENT

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J. (Oral):

CM(M) 435/2022 and CM APPL. 37291/2023

CM(M) 481/2023 and CM APPL. 37277/2023

1. The petition i.e., CM(M) 435/2022 has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated 16.04.2022 passed by ADJ-09, Central District, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi (`Trial Court') in Civil Suit No. 5820/2018, whereby the Trial Court has dismissed the Petitioner's application, filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (`CPC'), seeking impleadment in the said civil suit.

1.1. The petition i.e., CM(M) 481/2023 has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated 13.03.2023 passed by Trial Court in the aforesaid Civil Suit No. 5820/2018, whereby the Trial Court has deleted all the defendants except legal heirs (`LRs') of Late Bhai Balbir Singh.

2. The Applications bearing CM. APPL. No. 37291/2023 (in CM(M) 435/2022) and CM APPL. 37277/2023 (in CM(M) 481/2023) have been filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Order XXIII Rule 1 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (`CPC'), for taking on record the Family Settlement Agreement dated 17.07.2023 (`Settlement Agreement'), arrived at between the Applicants.

2.1. It is stated in the Applications that the Petitioner herein has now arrived at settlement with eight (8) of the Respondents (referred to as `Settling Respondents'), details whereof are enlisted in paragraph 1 of these Applications.

2.2. In the said paragraph no. 1 of these Applications, it is further clarified that no settlement has been arrived at with remaining seventeen (17) Respondents, whose names as well have been enlisted in paragraph no. 1 itself.

2.3. These Applications have been filed jointly by the Petitioner and the Settling Respondents (collectively referred to as `Applicants').

3. Vide the said Applications, the Applicants pray that the Settlement Agreement executed between them be recorded and taken on record.

4. It is stated that the Petitioner herein has agreed to have the settlement recorded in the present petitions i.e., CM(M) No. 435/2022, CM(M) 481/2023 and Test Case No. 108/2008.

4.1. It is stated that the Settlement Agreement has already been recorded by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Test Case No. 108/2008 and taken on record, earlier today.

5. The Petitioner in paragraph 5 of these Applications has set out the undertakings to the following effect:

"5. The Petitioner undertakes and affirms the following:

(i) That the Petitioner shall have no right, share, title, interest and shall neither have nor shall she ever claim any right of any nature whatsoever in the estate of Late Bhai Sundar Dass, his wife Smt. Soma Wanti and HUF of Bhai Sundar Dass;

(ii) That the Petitioner shall have no right, share, title, interest and neither have nor shall she ever claim any right of any nature whatsoever in relation to any of the below mentioned properties (`Properties'):

a. 9, Amrita Shergill Marg, New Delhi

b. 1/16-A, Asaf Ali Road New Delhi (except ground floor thereof);

c. 4/23B, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi.

d. Funds of the Hindu Joint family and funds (constituted by Bhai Sunder Das) lying with Bhai Mohan Singh, 15-A, Aurangzeb Road, New Delhi.

e. 27, Jor Bagh, New Delhi.

f. 71, Jor Bagh, New Delhi; and

g. 82 Kanals 21/2 marlas of Agricultural land at Jhundla, District Karnal.

(iii) That the Petitioner affirm to the terms of the Family Settlement dated 14th May 2019 and the said Memorandum of Understanding dated 14th May 2019 and that she shall not dispute, deny or challenge the Deed of Family Settlement dated 14th May 2019 and the said Memorandum of Understanding dated 14th May 2019, executed amongst the Settling Respondents and will give up all her claims contrary to the same.

(iv) That the Petitioner shall not initiate or prosecute any legal proceedings against Settling Respondents in respect of the above properties or against the Deed of Family Settlement dated 14th May 2019 and the said Memora