NAVEEN GUPTA Vs. SANTOSH GUPTA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I.A. No.21595/2014

(2.) In this view of the matter, the plaintiff, who is present in court, states that he would now not like to pursue this suit and, therefore, he seeks liberty to withdraw the present suit. I have asked the parties present as to whether they have sorted out the issue amongst themselves. They all answered in the affirmative. I see no reason as to why the plaintiff should not be permitted to withdraw the suit. Accordingly, this suit is dismissed as withdrawn. All the pending applications shall also stand dismissed as withdrawn."

(3.) After the expiry of almost about 9 years, the plaintiff has filed two above mentioned applications. In the application under Order XXII Rule 3 CPC, the prayers are made that the suit be revived and direction be issued to the defendants to comply and act upon their part of the obligations in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties in the month of November, 2005. The details of the obligations are given in para 5 of the application. In the second application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC, the interim order is sought against the defendants from interfering into peaceful possession of the rights and shares of the plaintiff in the property as per understanding, the detail of which is given in para 6 of the application during the pendency of the present proceedings.