The issue stemmed from a property dispute where the parties – all related to each other – reached a compromise.
As part of the truce, the respondents in the case where supposed to hand over a part of the property in question to the petitioner. The compromise involved a payment of ₹1 crore to the persons handing over the property.
A suit arising out of the dispute was resultantly decreed in terms of the compromise, and the parties were directed to remain bound by the terms and conditions of the settlement.
Subsequently, the petitioner got the property converted into a freehold one by paying conversion charges to the Delhi Development Authority, and a conveyance deed was registered in his favour July 6, 2017. When the respondents did not vacate the premises, a contempt petition was filed by the petitioner.
The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the undertaking given to the High Court stood violated, as the respondents were the duty-bound to vacate the premises on or before September 30, 2017, which they failed to do.
Source: Barandbench
