← Library
High Court of DelhiARB.P./686/2017

Nitin Chawla v. Sanil Bhatia

2018-03-08Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru2 pages

$~6 & 20 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ ARB.P. 686/2017 NITIN CHAWLA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr Rajiv K.

Garg, Mr Sandeep Banga, Mr Ashish Garg and Mr Govind Singh, Advocates.

versus SANIL BHATIA ..... Respondent Through:

Mr Siddharth Bhatia, Advocate.

AND + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 496/2017 and IA No. 185/2018 SHRI. NITIN CHAWLA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr Rajiv K.

Garg, Mr Sandeep Banga, Mr Ashish Garg and Mr Govind Singh, Advocates.

versus SANIL BHATIA ..... Respondent Through:

Mr Siddharth Bhatia, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 08.03.2018 1.

Mr Sanil Bhatia, respondent, is present in Court along with his Counsel and has handed over an undertaking by way of an affidavit agreeing to pay a sum of ₹40,00,000/- in full and final settlement of the dues claimed by the petitioner in the manner as set out in the said affidavit. The said affidavit is taken on record.

2.

Mr Bhatia, undertakes to this Court that the terms of the undertaking will be strictly complied with. This Court has also brought to the notice of Mr Bhatia that failure to do so would, apart from other proceedings, also invite action for Contempt of Court.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the petitioner had also undertaken to withdraw the suit bearing no. 792/2017 filed before District Court (Rohini). Mr Garg, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner agrees that the said suit will not be proceeded with till the amount is received in terms of the undertaking and would be withdrawn immediately thereafter. The petitioner is also present in Court and bound down to the said statement.

4.

In view of the above statements, the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present petitions. The same are dismissed as withdrawn. All pending applications are also disposed of.

5.

Mr Garg further requests that in the event there is any default apart from other action, the petitioner may also be permitted to revive the present petitions. It is so directed.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J MARCH 08, 2018 RK