RAM BHAROSE vs SHAKUNTALA & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 21st May, 2025 + CM(M) 645/2025, CM APPL. 20431/2025 & CM APPL. 20432/2025 RAM BHAROSE .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dushyant Chaudhary and Mr. Sunil Raut Bharti, Advs. with Petitioner in person. versus SHAKUNTALA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Avnish Shukla, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Neeraj Bhandari, Mr. Prashant Sharma and Mr. Prem Bhardwaj, Advs. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is defending a suit filed by Smt. Shakuntala (respondent No. 1 herein) who seeks specific performance of the contract and injunction. 2. Defendant No. 1 participated in the above said suit and had even filed his written statement. Thereafter, the matter was referred to mediation and settlement took place before Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi on 10.01.2024. In terms of the settlement, the plaintiff was to make a further payment of Rs. 3,30,000/- to defendant no. 1 and plaintiff had also agreed to withdraw the suit in question. 3. However, it appears that such settlement terms were, later on, found to be not acceptable to defendant No.1 as he did not appear before the learned Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 645/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:23.05.2025 15:17:43 Trial Court for making requisite statement in terms of the above said settlement. 4. He was, eventually, proceeded against ex parte on 21.08.2024. 5. He moved an application seeking setting aside such of ex parte order and is aggrieved by the dismissal of his such application. 6. Learned Trial Court was, primarily, concerned with the manner in which the defendant No.1 was conducting himself. It recorded in the impugned order that despite there being a settlement between the parties, n