$~1(2021)

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

EFA(OS) 2/2021, CM Nos.3031/2021, 3033-34/2021, 8432/2021,

11825-26/2021, 11883/2021 & 21295-96/2021

VARUN MOUDGIL & ORS.

..... Appellants

Through :

Ms. Kanika Agnihotri, Mr. Amer

Vaid and Ms. Yashodhara Gupta,

Advs.

NEENA KHATRY

..... Respondent

Through :

Mr. Saurabh Kirpal, Sr. Adv. with

Mr.

Tanmaya

Mehta

and

Mr.

Anunaya Mehta, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH

[Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.: (ORAL)

CM No.21296/2021

1. The prayer made in the captioned application is to grant exemption

from filing notarised/attested affidavits.

2. The captioned application is disposed of with a direction to the

applicants/appellants to place on record the duly notarised/attested

affidavits, within two weeks from today, notwithstanding the order passed

hereinbelow.

CM Nos.3033-34/2021 & 21295/2021

3. These applications have been filed on behalf of the appellants seeking

2021:DHC:2628-DB

condonation of delay in filing and re-filing the appeal as also in filing the

written submissions and convenience compilation, as directed by this Court.

3.1.

Mr. Saurabh Kirpal, learned senior counsel, who appears on behalf of

the respondent, says that, he has no objection, if the prayers made in the

captioned applications, are allowed.

4. Accordingly, the delay in filing and re-filing the appeal, as also in

filing the written submissions and convenience compilation, is condoned.

5. The captioned applications are, accordingly, disposed of.

EFA(OS) 2/2021 &

CM No.3031/2021[Application filed on behalf of the appellants seeking

stay on the operation of the impugned order dated 23.09.2020]

CM No.8432/2021[Application filed on behalf of the appellants seeking

leave to amend the memo of appeal]

CM No.11825/2021[Application filed on behalf of the appellants to place

on record subsequent developments]

CM No.11826/2021[Application filed on behalf of the appellants seeking

leave to seek consequential relief, if any, at a later stage, in view of the

subsequent developments that come into the knowledge of the appellants]

CM No.11883/2021[Application filed on behalf of the appellants seeking

production of documents in the possession, power and knowledge of the

respondent pertaining to the subsequent transfer of the suit premises by

the respondent to third parties during the pendency of the appeal]

6. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment of the learned

Single judge, dated 23.09.2020.

6.1.

The appellants before us are the judgment debtors while the

respondent is the decree holder.

2021:DHC:2628-DB

Background facts: -

7. For the purposes of adjudication of the appeal, the following facts,

qua which, largely, there is no dispute, are required to be noticed.

7.1.

The respondent/decree holder, i.e., the original plaintiff had filed two

suits before this court, i.e., CS(OS) Nos. 674/2017 and 675/2017. These two

suits concerned agreements to sell, dated 11.05.2017 and 29.06.2017.

7.2.

The suit properties, which were involved in the aforementioned suits,

were: the basement, ground floor and third floor, along with terrace, situate

at D-6/32, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi.

7.3.

While the aforementioned suits, were pending, the parties arrived at a

settlement amongst themselves, which resulted in a Settlement Agreement

dated 22.04.2019 [hereafter referred to as ‘SA’] being drawn-up. The SA

morphed into a consent decree, dated 01.05.2019. The broad terms of

settlement, as arrived at between the parties, as incorporated in the SA, were

as follows:

(i)

The respondent/decree holder was required to pay Rs. 10.50 crores to

an entity going by the name of IDFC First Ltd. [hereafter referred to as

“IDFC”].

(ii)

The appellants/judgment debtors were