VIKESH MAJITHIA Vs. ASHA RANI
LAWS(DLH)-2021-9-116
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on September 28,2021

Vikesh Majithia Appellant
VERSUS
ASHA RANI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. - (1.)On the previous date i.e., 15/9/2021, when the appeal was listed for the first time before us, we recorded the following:
"2. Mr. S.K. Sharma, who appears on behalf of the appellants/plaintiffs, says that, there is a possibility of the parties arriving at a settlement, and therefore, limited notice may be issued, for this purpose, in the matter.

3. To be noted, this appeal is directed against the order dated 3/9/2021, passed by the Learned District Judge in an application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

3.1. A perusal of the record shows that, the appellants, who are the original plaintiffs, have filed a suit for specific performance of the collaboration agreement dated 7.1.2014, executed by them with the respondent/defendant.

3.2. Mr. Sharma does not dispute the fact that, the subject superstructure had to be built in 16 months. It is, however, his contention that, the date for commencement of that period would get triggered only, after the building plan was sanctioned by the concerned municipal authorities.

3.3. It appears from the record that, the respondent/defendant has taken the position that, since the appellants/plaintiffs were at fault, and delayed performance obligations undertaken by them, the collaboration agreement was terminated by her, via a legal notice dated 24/2/2018.

3.4. It appears that, thereafter, the respondent/defendant entered into a fresh collaboration agreement with another person/entity, in August 2020. On being queried, Mr. Sharma does concede that, after the execution of the fresh collaboration agreement, the new collaborator has constructed, at subject site, two storeys.

3.5. It is on account of these broad facts that, the Learned District Judge did not deem it fit to grant any injunction to the appellants/plaintiffs.

4. However, since Mr. Sharma says that, there is a possibility of a settlement being arrived at between the parties, albeit through mediation, notice shall issue on this limited aspect to the respondent/defendant, via all permissible modes including e-mail.

5. List the matter on 28.9.2021."

(2.)Today, Mr. Shivanshu Kumar, Advocate has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent [i.e., the original defendant].
2.1. Mr. Kumar says that, he will file his vakalatnama with the Registry of this Court, within the next two days.

2.2. Mr. Kumar says that, while the respondent would have no objection, if the parties are referred to a mediator, however, since the respondent is approximately 86 years old, the trial in the matter should be expedited.

(3.)Mr. A.K. Sharma, who appears on behalf of the appellants [i.e., the original plaintiffs], says that, the appeal can be disposed of with an appropriate direction, for expediting the completion of pleadings, and hastening the trial, even while the parties attempt to settle the matter with intercession of the court appointed mediator.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.