IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF APRIL, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR R.F.A. No.1741/2015 BETWEEN:
SRI.S.M. MADANKUMAR S/O. LATE S.B. MEGHARAJ, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT 117, RADIANT ENCLAVE, ARUNDHATI NAGAR, SUN CITY ROAD, KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN, BANGALORE – 560 060 (BY SRI.MUJTABA, ADVOCATE) AND:
M/S. CARBONE LORRAINE INDIA PVT. LTD. A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.98/5, WHEELER ROAD EXTENSION, COOK TOWN, BANGALORE-560 084 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ALSO AT NO.5, BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA, BANGALORE-560 099 ... APPELLANT ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRADEEP KUMAR. J, ADVOCATE) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.08.2015 PASSED IN O.S.NO.5800/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXVIII ADDL.
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-39), DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This is a plaintiff’s appeal challenging the correctness and legality of the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2015 passed by the XXXVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, in O.S.No.5800/2010.
2. Learned advocates appearing for the parties have filed a joint memo whereunder terms of settlement as agreed between the parties have been set out. It reads as under:
“1. The Respondent is herewith paying a sum of ` 4,02,000 (Rs Four Lakh Two Thousand Only) to the Appellant through LIC wherein the appellant is at liberty to either opt for Cash payment and balance payment as monthly or quarterly payments as pension whichever is permissible by LIC or appellant/employee opts for.
2. The Petitioner accepts that the above terms are in full and final settlement of all his claims and he has no further claims against the Respondent in relation to any matter whatsoever. That all claims, financial or non-financial stand fully settled and Respondent or petitioner shall not agitate any claim before any forum of law with regard to any matter including further payment. The Respondent also does not have any claims against the Appellant.”
3. Parties are present before the Court and they submit that after having understood the contents of joint memo they have affixed their signatures voluntarily, without any force, threat or coercion and they also submit that they have agreed to the terms as set out in the joint memo.
4. Learned advocates appearing for parties in token of having identified the parties appearing before the Court, have also affixed their signatures. The photocopy of identity card of Mr. Madan Kumar – appellant is also made available and same is placed on record.
5. In that view of the matter, there is no impediment for accepting the joint memo. Hence, it is hereby accepted. For the reasons aforestated, I proceed to pass the following:
JUDGMENT (i) Appeal stands disposed of in terms of joint memo.
(ii) Judgment and decree dated 31.08.2015 passed by the XXXVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, in O.S.No.5800/2010, stands substituted as per the terms set out in the joint memo.
(iii) Registry to draw the decree in terms of joint memo and is also directed to refund 75% of the court fee forthwith in view of settlement arrived at between parties. Cheque shall be issued to appellant on proper identification.
SD/-
JUDGE DR