IMPORTANT POINT
The sanctity of settlements recorded by the court and the obligation of parties to honor such settlements.

JUDGMENT

Mini Pushkarna, J. - The present appeals challenge the various orders passed by learned Single Judge in execution petition being Ex. P. 336/2014. Appeal being EFA (OS) 7/2020 has been filed by the Judgment Debtors with prayer for quashing and setting aside the orders dated 08th November, 2019, 23rd July, 2019 and earlier orders passed by the learned Single Judge in EX. P. 336/2014 on the ground that they had not instructed their counsel to settle the matter. Connected appeal being EFA (OS) 7/2021 has been filed by the son of the Judgment Debtors with prayer of setting aside the order dated 22nd October, 2021 and all previous orders passed in EX. P. 336/2014 on the ground that the property in question which is the subject matter of attachment and auction in the execution proceedings, is under his ownership on the basis of gift deed dated 28th May, 2015 executed by his mother, the Judgment Debtor no. 2, in his favour. For convenience sake, appellants in EFA (OS) 7/2020 shall be referred as Judgment Debtors and appellant in EFA (OS) 7/2021 shall be referred as son of the Judgment Debtors.

2. Facts of the case as canvassed on behalf of respondent/Decree Holder are that he had loaned a sum of AED 1,500,000/- (AED one million and five hundred thousand) to Judgment Debtor no. 2. In acknowledgment of the said loan, the Judgment Debtor no. 2 executed an acknowledgment, and she also handed over a cheque bearing no. 001001 drawn on Habib Bank AG Zurich for a sum of 1.4 million AED signed by her husband, Judgment Debtor no. 1. Admittedly, the said cheque was dishonoured, which led to filing of suit by respondent/Decree Holder in the Commercial Plenary Court in Dubai. The suit of the respondent/Decree Holder was decreed in his favour by way of judgment and decree dated 15th December, 2013 passed by the Commercial Plenary Court in Dubai. Thus, execution petition being EX. P. 336/2014 was filed by respondent/Decree Holder for execution of the aforesaid judgment and decree before the learned Single Judge.

3. When the matter was listed for hearing on 31st July, 2018, learned counsel for the Judgment Debtors submitted that his client was ready and willing to pay a sum of Rs.3 crores as full and final settlement of the decree. Thus, the execution petition was disposed of by learned Single Judge vide order dated 31st July, 2018 recording the settlement of the parties. For the purpose of working out the modalities of the payment, the matter was directed to be placed before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre ("Mediation Centre") by the learned Single Judge.

4. Subsequently, application, i.e. E.A. 412/2018 was filed on behalf of the Judgment Debtors for recalling the order dated 31st July, 2018 on the ground that they had not instructed their counsel to settle the matter. The learned Single Judge by order dated 08th October, 2018 dismissed the application moved by the Judgment Debtors, thereby holding that the allegations made by the Judgment Debtors against their counsels to the effect that no instructions were given to them to enter into the settlement, was proved to be false.

5. Further, by order dated 08th October, 2018, the learned Single Judge attached the property in question being House no. 42-B and 43, Ashoka Park Main, Village Basai Darapur, Rohtak Road, Rampura, New Delhi-110035 ("subject property") and also appointed a Court Auctioneer. The learned Single Judge also appointed a Valuer for valuing the subject property in question. Accordingly, the Valuer completed his process of valuation and filed his report. Subsequently, by order dated 28th May, 2019, learned Single Judge directed the Court Auctioneer to take steps to auction the subject property.

6. Later on, two applications being EAs. (OS) 313/2019 & 314/2019 were filed by Mridul Gupta, son of the Judgment Debtors seeking recall of the attachment order dated 08th October, 2018 against the subject property. The same were considered by the learned Single Judge i