Sajad Akhater vs. Rafiq Mohd

Held

The Court noted that the matter was referred to the National Lok Adalat for determination. Both parties, the appellant and the respondents, voluntarily and amicably settled the dispute with their free consent, will, and volition, and without any undue influence or misrepresentation. The parties have finally settled the matter, and as per the agreed terms, a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- is to be paid by the Insurance Company to the claimant/appellant over and above any amount already paid. This amount is to be deposited within 45 days. The Court found that the terms and conditions of the settlement were explained to the learned counsel for the parties, who accepted them as correct and appended their signatures. The members of the Lok Adalat also counter-signed the settlement. Therefore, the matter stands finally settled between the parties, and nothing further is due. The operative direction is to send the file to the Registry of the Hon'ble High Court for doing the needful and for consignment.

Facts

This matter was referred to the National Lok Adalat for determination. The appellant, Sajad Akhater, and the respondents, Rafiq Mohd. & Ors. (with respondent No. 3 being the NIC), voluntarily and amicably settled the dispute. The settlement was reached with free consent, will, and volition, without undue influence or misrepresentation. As per the settlement, the Insurance Company agreed to pay a lump sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- to the claimant/appellant, in addition to any amount already paid. This sum is to be deposited within 45 days. The terms were explained to the counsel for the parties, who accepted them and signed the settlement.

Key Issues

1. Whether the parties have voluntarily and amicably settled the dispute with free consent, will, and volition, without undue influence or misrepresentation? (Question of fact) 2. Whether the terms of the settlement, including the payment of Rs. 2,50,000/- by the Insurance Company to the claimant/appellant within 45 days, are acceptable and binding on the parties? (Question of fact) The appellant was represented by Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate. Respondents No. 1 and 2 were ex parte. Respondent No. 3 was represented by Mr. Abhay Gupta, Advocate, along with Ms. Tanu Mohil and Ms. Sunita Verma from NIC. The judgment records that both parties have voluntarily and amicably settled the matter. No specific arguments from either side regarding legal provisions or precedents are recorded, as the matter was resolved through a settlement.