Indu Sunil (Now Dead) Through Legal Representative vs M/S Bright Paint And Chemicals Factory

Alok Kumar Verma, J

The present Appeal has been filed by the appellant-plaintiff under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Learned Additional District Judge/Vth Fast Track Court, Dehradun has decreed the Original Suit No.24 of 2004 “Smt. Indu Sunil and Another Vs. Bright Paints and Chemicals and Others”, on 23.12.2009, whereby, the learned Judge has directed the respondent-defendant to pay Rs.12,67,409.52/-(Rupees Twelve Lakh Sixty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Nine and Fifty Two Paise) to the plaintiff along with an interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the suit till the final payment. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-plaintiff against the finding of issue no.2.

Heard Mr. S.K. Jain, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Siddharth Jain, learned counsel for appellant and Mr. V.K. Kohli, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. I.P. Kohli, learned counsel for respondent.

Mr. Rajat Gupta, the appellant no.1/1 and the son of late Smt. Indu Sunil, the original plaintiff-appellant, is present through video conferencing. He is identified by Mr. Siddharth Jain, Advocate.

Mr. Atul Bhatia, the proprietor of the respondent-defendant, is present through video conferencing. He is identified by Mr. I.P. Kohli, Advocate.

Both the parties submitted that they have filed a compromise application (Miscellaneous Application IA No.9016 of 2025) along with their affidavits.

As per the compromise, the respondent has paid a sum of Rs.29,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty Nine Lakh) to the appellant no.1/1, Rajat Gupta (proprietor of Vigyan Lime Industries) through a Bank Draft No.003815 dated 23.04.2025 drawn on State Bank of India, Dehradun in full and final satisfaction to the impugned decree. There would be no claim of whatsoever, against the respondent, after the settlement. Appellant no.1/1, Rajat Gupta has agreed to withdraw all the cases, filed against the respondent.

Mr. Rajat Gupta, the appellant no.1/1, and Mr. Atul Bhatia, the proprietor of the respondent, submitted that they have filed the compromise with their free will and without any pressure. They have requested to decide the present appeal on the basis of the said Compromise.

The compromise is verified.

The First Appeal (FA No.14 of 2010) is decided in terms of the compromise (Miscellaneous Application IA No.9016 of 2025).

Registry shall draw a decree accordingly.

The Compromise (Miscellaneous Application IA No.9016 of 2025) will be a part of the decree.