Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 989

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Subramonium Prasad, J
Amitabh Narayan – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Narayan – Respondent
CS(OS) 350/2022

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Jai Sahai Endlaw, Shruti Kapur

A court may dispose of a suit in terms of a compromise agreement under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, provided the agreement is lawful. Undertakings made to the court within such settlement carry the gravity of contempt if violated.

Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order XXIII Rule 3 - Settlement of Suit - Requirement of lawful compromise - Parties settling disputes through a memorandum and seeking a decree in terms thereof - It is the duty of the Court to ensure the compromise is lawful and enforceable. (Paras 1, 3, 4)

(B) Compromise Decree - Recording of undertaking - Impact of breach - Parties voluntarily entering into a settlement and submitting undertakings to the Court regarding the vacation of property and payment of consideration - Any violation of the terms or the undertaking given to the Court would amount to contempt of court. (Paras 14, 15, 17, 18)

Facts of the case:
Following a dispute over the ownership and partition of a residential property, the parties reached a settlement through a Memorandum. The Plaintiff, owning an undivided share, sold their interest to the other parties. The terms included specific provisions for a temporary, limited license to reside in a portion of the property until a fixed date, failing which heavy financial penalties and eviction consequences would apply, along with an agreement to withdraw all pending claims.

Findings of Court:
Upon perusal of the Memorandum, the Court found the settlement to be lawful and enforceable. The Court directed the parties to abide by the terms, which included the specific timeline for the vacation of the premises and the handling of property access. The suit was disposed of in accordance with the terms of the settlement, and a decree was ordered to be drawn.

Issues: Whether the compromise agreement presented by the parties is lawful and enforceable under the Code of Civil Procedure and whether the undertakings therein can be recorded as part of the final decree to ensure compliance.

Ratio Decidendi: Where parties arrive at a mutual settlement of all disputes and file a formal agreement alongside undertakings to the Court, the Court, upon verifying the legality of such terms, is empowered to dispose of the suit in terms of the compromise, ensuring all parties are bound to their respective obligations including civil and contempt consequences for non-compliance.

Result: Suit disposed of in terms of the Settlement Agreement.

Table of Content
1. application for recording compromise under order xxiii rule 3 cpc. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's power to record settlement agreement and dispose of suit. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. procedural directions regarding court-sealed property access. (Para 6 , 7)
4. final disposal of suit in accordance with recorded settlement. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)

O R D E R

I.A. 127/2026

1. The present application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC on behalf of the Plaintiff for placing on record the Memorandum of Settlement dated 26.12.2025 and seeking a decree in terms thereof.

2. The present suit is one for partition, rendition of accounts and permanent injunction. During the pendency of the suit, the parties have entered into a settlement on 26.12.2025. The entire Memorandum of Understanding dated 28.10.2025 is reproduced as under:-

Memorandum of Settlement

This Memorandum (hereinafter, the “Memorandum”) is signed on this 26th day of December, 2025 at New Delhi, India for purposes of recording the settlement orally arrived at and agreed to by and amongst the following Parties:

(1) Mr. Amitabh Narayan, aged about 66 years, (PAN: AAFPN8921J and Adhaar No. 3256 7943 0095), son of Late Sh. Kanwal Narayan, resident of House No. 44, Darya Ganj, New Delhi - 110002, India (hereinafter referred to as “First Party”/ “Amitabh Narayan”, which expression shall, unless the context otherwise requires, include all his heirs and legal representatives); and

(2) Mr. Ashok Narayan, aged about 64 years, (PAN: AAFPN8922M and Adhaar No. 602938918676), son of Late Sh. Kanwal Narayan, resident of House No. 44, Darya Ganj, New Delhi - 110002, India (hereinafter referred to as “Second Party”/”Ashok Narayan”, which expression shall, unless the context otherwise requires, include all his heirs and legal representatives); and

(3) Mr. Gautam Narayan, aged about 62 years, (PAN: AAIPN4743P and Adhaar No. 232566410252) son of Late Sh. Kanwal Narayan, permanent resident of House No. 44, Darya Ganj, New Delhi - 110002, India, (hereinafter referred to as “Third Party”/”Gautam Narayan”, which expression shall, unless the context otherwise requires, include all his heirs and legal representatives); and

(4) Mr. Sidharth Narayan, aged about 35 years, (PAN: AIDPN1709N and Adhaar No. 7976 0645 9335) son of Sh. Amitabh Narayan, resident of House No. 44, Darya Ganj, New Delhi - 110002, India (hereinafter referred to as “Fourth Party”/ “Sidharth”, which expression shall, unless the context otherwise requires, include all his heirs and legal representatives); and

(5) Mrs. Shreya Narayan, aged about 31 years, (PAN: AVHPJ8094M and Adhaar No. 8039 5403 3170), wife of Sh. Sidharth Narayan, resident of House No. 44, Darya Ganj, New Delhi - 110002, India (hereinafter referred to as “Fifth Party”/ “Shreya”, which expression shall, unless the context otherwise requires, include all his heirs and legal representatives); and

(6) Master Adhiraaj Narayan, aged about 2 years, (Adhaar No. 8498 1636 7123), son of Sh. Sidharth Narayan, resident of House No. 44, Darya Ganj, New Delhi - 110002, India, (hereinafter referred to as “Sixth Party”, which expression shall, unless the context otherwise requires, include all his heirs and legal representatives) and being a minor, the Sixth Party and his interests are represented through and by his father Sidharth, the Fourth Party and his mother Shreya, the Fifth Party, being his legal guardian(s); and

(7) Mrs. Neha Narayan, aged about 33 years, (PAN: AKLPN9932B and Adhaar No. 2630 4566 0297), daughter of Sh. Amitabh Narayan, resident of House No. 44, Darya Ganj, New Delhi - 110002, India (hereinafter referred to as “Seventh Party”/ “Neha”, which expression shall, unless the context otherwise requires, include all her heirs and legal representatives); and

(8) Mrs. Suman Narayan, aged about 63 years, (PAN: AAJPN6102H and Adhaar No. 4049 6181 2663), wife of Sh. Amitabh Narayan, resident of House No. 44, Darya Ganj, New Delhi - 110002, India, (hereinafter referred

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 989

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHISubramonium Prasad, JAmitabh Narayan – AppellantVersusAshok Narayan – RespondentCS(OS) 350/2022

A court may dispose of a suit in terms of a compromise agreement under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, provided the agreement is lawful. Undertakings made to the court within such settlement carry the gravity of contempt if violated.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Subramonium Prasad, J
Amitabh Narayan – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Narayan – Respondent
CS(OS) 350/2022