CHANDRIKA PRASAD vs DOCBEL INDUSTRIES

Judgment text excerpt

$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 17.07.2025 + W.P.(C) 16997/2022 CHANDRIKA PRASAD .....Petitioner Through: None. versus DOCBEL INDUSTRIES .....Respondent Through: Mr. Harvinder Singh, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral) 1. None appears on behalf of the Petitioner. 2. Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that he had previously also stated that the Petitioner is not interested in pursuing the matter since the matter has been settled by the Petitioner with the Respondent. 3. The record reflects that the Petition was filed in the year 2022 assailing the Award dated 18.05.2022 passed by the learned Labour Court. The Counter Affidavit was filed, however no Rejoinder is filed. 4. Learned Counsel for the Respondent seeks to rely upon Paragraphs 5 and 6 of his Counter Affidavit in this behalf to submit that the Petitioner had approached the management that they wish to withdraw the present Petitions as he had filed the present Petition without comprehending the Award of the learned Labour Court. Reliance is placed on Paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Counter Affidavit which are extracted below in this behalf: Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Date:18.07.2025 W.P.(C) 16997/2022 Page 1 of 2 17:52:42 “5. That thereafter the petitioner approached the deponent stating that due to the pressure of some other person, he had agreed to file the present writ petition against the respondent and wishes to withdraw the same. He wrote a letter in his handwriting, to the deponent, stating that he wishes to withdraw the present petition, which he had filed, without comprehending the award of the Labour Court. The deponent, with the intent to avoid time consuming and costly litigation, entere