1 FA-13-2011 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.13 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2870 OF 2011 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3236 OF 2011 Signet Hotels Pvt.Ltd. ...Appellant Versus M/s.Himgiri Dealcom Pvt.Ltd. ...Respondent Mr.Samit Shukla i/b. MDP & Partners for appellant. Mr.A.A.Khan with Mr.Rahul Sharma i/b. M.Tripathi & Co. for respondent. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. October 7, 2011. P.C. 1. Summary Civil Suit No.30 of 2009 was decreed on admission as per the order passed by the learned 2nd Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division at Thane on 19/10/2010. The suit was allowed upholding the plaintiff’s 2 FA-13-2011 right to recover an amount of Rs.13,79,07,286/- (Rupees thirteen crores seventy nine lakhs seven thousand two hundred eighty six only) with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of the order i.e. 19/10/2010 to the realisation of the entire amount. The farad sheet indicates that a total amount of Rs.14,38,79,490/- (Rupees fourteen crores thirty eight lakhs seventy nine thousand four hundred ninety only) has been deposited with the Registry of this Court by the appellant – defendant. 2. During the pendency of this appeal the parties negotiated on an amicable settlement and such a settlement has been arrived at. The terms and conditions of the settlement between the parties have been reduced in writing in the form of “Consent Terms” and placed before us. Shri Chandrakant Bhansali representing the plaintiff and Shri Sudhir Sinha representing the defendant are present before us and we are informed that Shri Sudhir Sinha is the authorised officer of the defendant – company in place of Shri Deepak Gupta and a copy of the resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the defendant – company on 23/3/2011 has been brought on record. Both Shri Chandrakant Bhansali and Shri Sudhir Sinha have verified the terms of settlement and they have stated that they 3 FA-13-2011 understood the terms of the settlement, it would be binding on each of them and Summary Civil Suit no.30 of 2009 has been agreed to be decreed in terms of the said terms. We have gone through the settlement terms. The plaintiff has admitted to have received a sum of Rs. 16,80,00,000/- from the defendant prior to filing of the suit and the balance amount due and payable under the agreement for sale by the defendant to the plaintiff was Rs.16,80,00,000/-. The plaintiff has been allowed to withdraw the deposited amount with the Registry of this Court and thus the plaintiff would be in receipt of Rs.31,18,79,490/- (Rupees thirty one crores eighteen lakhs seventy nine thousand four hundred ninety only) as against the total sum payable under the said agreement. The payment of the balance amount also has been specified in Clause 4 of the settlement. The parties have agreed for the disposal of the suit and drawing a decree in terms of the settlement and requested the Court accordingly. We find the settlement terms to be just, fair and proper so as to protect the interest of both the parties. 3. The Consent Terms are taken on record and marked as “X” for identification. Undertakings of both the parties in settlement terms are accepted. 4 FA-13-2011 4. Hence the appeal is allowed in terms of the Consent Terms and the Registry is directed to issue a decree accordingly. 5. Civil Applications stand disposed. 6. Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order. (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)