Mukesh Jain vs Rajesh Kumar Jain

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Mar 18, 2026

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1263140

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1263140
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Subramonium Prasad
Decided On: Mar 18, 2026
Case Number: CS(OS)/262/2022
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mukesh Jain

Advocate Mr. Hirein Sharma, Mr. Saurabh Goel

Respondent

Rajesh Kumar Jain

Advocate Mr. Vaibhav Sethi, Ms. Priya Pathania, Mr. Gaganpreet Singh, Mr. Arihant Jain, Mr. Samaksh Wadhwa

Excerpt

.....filed by the sister of the defendant herein, have been settled. it is stated that a decree has already been passed in cs(os) 198/2022 on 10.02.2026 in terms of the abovementioned settlement agreement.6. this court has gone through the settlement agreement dated23.01.2026, terms of which are legal, lawful and are capable of being accepted by the court.7. it is also noted that the present application has been jointly filed bythe plaintiff and the defendants, signed by them and as such, the parties shall be bound by the terms of the settlement agreement dated 23.01.2026.8. in view of the fact that settlement has been arrived at between theparties, the suit is disposed of in terms of order xxiii rule 3 of the cpc as well the settlement agreement dated 23.01.2026 entered into between the parties.9. pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.10. let the decree sheet be prepared accordingly.11. in view of the fact that the parties have entered into a settlement andin view of the judgment passed by the division bench of this court in nutan batra v. buniyaad associates, 2018 scc online del 12916, this court is inclined to direct the refund of the entire court fees to the plaintiff.12. let the court fees be refunded in accordance with section 16 of thecourt fees act, 1870.13. the application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.14. it is made clear that any violation of the terms of the settlementagreement dated 23.01.2026 by any of the parties will attract the provisions of contempt of courts act, 1971.subramonium prasad, j march 18, 2026 rahul

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 262/2022 & I.A. 25163/2023, I.A. 7047/2026 MUKESH JAIN .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma and Mr. Saurabh Goel, Advs
versus
RAJESH KUMAR JAIN .....Defendant Through: Mr. Vaibhav Sethi, Ms. Priya Pathania, Mr. Gaganpreet Singh, Mr. Arihant Jain, Mr. Samaksh Wadhwa, Advs
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

ORDER

% 18.03.2026

1. I.A. 7047/2026 has been filed by the Parties under Order XXIII Rule

3 of the CPC for disposing of the Suit in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties vide a Settlement Agreement dated 23.01.2026.

2. The instant Suit has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking specific

performance of agreement to sell dated 08.09.2021 & Supplementary agreement to sell dated 28.09.2021 qua property bearing No. 16, Block-A, Wazirpur Industrial Area, Delhi-110052.

3. Vide Order dated 21.08.2025, upon a joint request made by the

parties, the parties were referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.

4. Vide Settlement Agreement dated 23.01.2026 the parties have settled

their disputes amicably. A copy of the Settlement Agreement has been filed along with the application and the same reads as under:

5. It is stated that by way of the Settlement Agreement dated 23.01.2026,

the present Suit as well as CS(OS) 198/2022, filed by the sister of the Defendant herein, have been settled. It is stated that a Decree has already been passed in CS(OS) 198/2022 on 10.02.2026 in terms of the abovementioned Settlement Agreement.

6. This Court has gone through the Settlement Agreement dated

23.01.2026, terms of which are legal, lawful and are capable of being accepted by the Court.

7. It is also noted that the present Application has been jointly filed by

the Plaintiff and the Defendants, signed by them and as such, the Parties shall be bound by the terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 23.01.2026.

8. In view of the fact that settlement has been arrived at between the

Parties, the Suit is disposed of in terms of Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC as well the Settlement Agreement dated 23.01.2026 entered into between the Parties.

9. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

10. Let the Decree Sheet be prepared accordingly.

11. In view of the fact that the Parties have entered into a settlement and

in view of the Judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Nutan Batra v. Buniyaad Associates, 2018 SCC OnLine Del 12916, this Court is inclined to direct the refund of the entire court fees to the Plaintiff.

12. Let the court fees be refunded in accordance with Section 16 of the

Court Fees Act, 1870.

13. The application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

14. It is made clear that any violation of the terms of the Settlement

Agreement dated 23.01.2026 by any of the parties will attract the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J MARCH 18, 2026 Rahul

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2026 Same Parties Mukesh Jain vs Rajesh Kumar Jain Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Subramonium Prasad