← Library
High Court of DelhiRFA/772/2017

Madan Mohan Sekhri v. Shubhdev Lall Sekri

2017-09-13Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Valmiki J. Mehta2 pages

$~17 & 18 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ RFA 772/2017 & CM Nos. 32738-39/2017 MADAN MOHAN SEKHRI ..... Appellant Through:

Mr. S.K.Sharma and Mr. Umang Chopra, Advocates.

Appellant in person.

versus SHUBHDEV LALL SEKRI & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Arvind Dhingra, Adv.

Respondent no.1 in person.

+ RFA 776/2017 & CM No. 32961/2017 MADAN MOHAN SEKHRI ..... Appellant Through:

Mr. S.K.Sharma and Mr. Umang Chopra, Advocates.

Appellant in person.

versus SHUBHDEV LALL SEKRI & ORS.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Arvind Dhingra, Adv.

Respondent no.1 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA

O R D E R

% 13.09.2017 1.

These appeals were heard at length.

During the course of hearing various proposals were mooted to finish of this litigation in the family. Counsels for the parties have ably assisted this Court. Appellant is present in person as also the respondent no.1 who is the brother of the appellant. RFA 772/2017 & conn.

2.

These appeals are disposed of with the consent order that appellant will receive from the respondents a sum of Rs.1.80 crores in full and final satisfaction of any and every claim which the appellant may have against the respondents and with respect to suit property. Respondents are granted time of one year from today to make the aforesaid payment to the appellant. Payment to the appellant will be simultaneous to the appellant handing over possession of the first floor in the suit property to the respondents or their nominee.

3.

It is further clarified that the aforesaid amount of Rs.1.80 crores can be reduced as per the agreements between the parties arising from circumstances where possibly a builder may be involved for re-construction of the property. The final mode of payment of amount under this order by the respondents to the appellant will be as per any agreement which the parties may enter into.

4.

The appeals are accordingly disposed of as compromised in terms of the aforesaid order.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J SEPTEMBER 13, 2017 ib RFA 772/2017 & conn.