SYED AFI MOAZZAM Vs. NAFEES FATMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a suit for declaration, partition, rendition of accounts, mandatory injunction and permanent injunction. Defendant No.1 Smt. Nafees Fatma Hashmi is the mother of the plaintiff No.1 and defendants 2 to 5. Plaintiff No.2 is the wife of plaintiff No.1. Vide order dated 15th January, 2010, this Court noted that parties were closely related and purposed to explore the possibility of a settlement. They were directed to appear before Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre on 22nd January, 2010. When the matter was taken up on 07th April, 2010, the Court was informed by the learned counsel for the parties that an oral settlement had been arrived between the parties and some time was required to produce the same in the written. The parties were again directed to appear before the Mediation Centre on 15th April, 2010.

(2.) ON 17th May, 2010, a settlement agreement was recorded before Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre which is Ex.P-2. All the parties to the suit were also the parties to the settlement agreement dated 17th May, 2010. The settlement agreement was signed by all of them in the presence of Mediators and their counsels Mr. Nasis Aziz was representing the plaintiff, whereas Mr. S.Hilal Nizami was appearing for the defendants. The settlement agreement was also signed by both the counsels.

(3.) WHEN the matter was taken up on 29th October, 2010, statement of defendant No.5, who was present in the Court, was recorded by the Court. He admitted that the agreement Ex.P-2 was signed by him before Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre in the presence of his counsel S.Hilal Nizami. He also admitted that his counsel had also singed the settlement agreement `X-1' in his presence. He admitted that he had executed a vakalatnama in favour of S.Hilal Nizami, which is available on the Court file. He claimed to be a post-graduate with knowledge of reading and writing English. He also stated that he had read the settlement agreement Ex.P-2 and understood it before he signed it. He, however, claimed that when he signed the agreement on 17th May, 2010, he was in need of money and that is why he was agreed to accept the cheques mentioned in para 13(h) of the agreement Ex.P-2. He also admitted that he had engaged Mr Shafi Ullah as his Advocate on 07th September, 2010 and that he had appeared in the Court on 08th September, 2010. According to him, the post-dated cheques, mentioned in the settlement agreement, were not handed over to him on 08th September, 2010 and the matter was adjourned to 23rd September, 2010. He admitted that he had appeared before the Joint Registrar on 23rd September, 2010. He also admitted that he had not appeared before the Court at any time after 08 th September, 2010.