Delhi High Court

FAO (COMM)/147/2026 of SHREYAS KUKREJA Vs SARABJIT SINGH AND ANR on 11 August 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

100/2026 & connected matter Page 1 of 3 $~31 & 32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010148262026 + FAO (COMM) 100/2026 & CM APPL. 23551/2026 SARABJIT SINGH & ANR. .....Appellants Through: Mr. Mohit Aggarwal, Mr. Geetansh Nagpal, Ms. Pooja Saini & Ms.

$~31 & 32

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

#

CNR No. DLHC010148262026

+

FAO (COMM) 100/2026 & CM APPL. 23551/2026

SARABJIT SINGH & ANR.

.....Appellants

Through:

Mr. Mohit Aggarwal, Mr. Geetansh

Nagpal, Ms. Pooja Saini & Ms. Prerna

Pahwa, Advocates. (M. 9811449071)

versus

SHREYAS KUKREJA

.....Respondent

Through:

Mr. Kunal Kalra along with Mr. Vipin,

Advocates.

~32

#

CNR No. DLHC010231352026

+

FAO (COMM) 147/2026

SHREYAS KUKREJA

.....Appellant

Through:

Mr. Kunal Kalra along with Mr. Vipin,

Advocates.

versus

SARABJIT SINGH AND ANR

.....Respondents

Through:

Mr. Mohit Aggarwal, Mr. Geetansh

Nagpal, Ms. Pooja Saini, Ms. Prerna

Pahwa, Advocates.

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

O R D E R

% 11.08.2026

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present appeals arise out a Collaboration Agreement dated 21st February, 2024 that had been entered into between two brothers namely Mr.

Sarabjit Singh and Mr. Taranjit Singh (hereinafter “Owners”) on the one hand and Mr. Shreyas Kukreja, sole proprietor of M/s. Dream Work Consultants (hereinafter “Builder”) on the other hand, in respect of property bearing No. B-54, admeasuring 130 Sq. yds. situated at Fateh Nagar, Hari Nagar, Jail Road, New Delhi (hereinafter “subject property”).

3. Under the said Collaboration Agreement, disputes arose between the parties which led to the institution of CS(COMM) 861/2025. In the said suit, order dated 19th March, 2026 was passed by the ld. District Judge (Commercial Judge)-03, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi wherein an interim injunction was granted under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 of CPC. The present two appeals have been filed challenging the said order.

4. During the pendency of these appeals, the parties had approached the mediation centre for resolution of their disputes. They have now resolved their disputes vide Settlement Agreement dated 28th July, 2026.

5. The terms of settlement are contained in clauses 1 to 14 of the said agreement. The broad settlement between the parties is that the Builder would give a No Objection Certificate (NoC) to the Owners to get the rest of the portion of the subject property made as per their discretion. In addition, the parties have agreed that the Owners shall pay a sum of Rs. 36 lakhs to the Builder. It has been agreed that the NoC shall be handed over by Builder today itself, however, the same shall come into effect upon receipt of the full payment of the said sum of Rs. 36 lakhs. The payment terms have also been agreed by the parties, as per which, the payment is to be done in three instalments. Copies of the demand drafts are annexed with the agreement.

6. The Court has perused the terms of settlement. The same are lawful and legal. There is no impediment in recording the settlement. The settlement agreement is signed by the Appellants and Respondents as also their respective counsels. The learned Mediator has also signed the said agreement.

7. The disputes having been resolved between the parties, the parties shall be bound by the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement dated 28th July, 2026. The suit i.e., CS(COMM) 861/2025 would now stand decreed in terms of Clause 1 to 14 of the said Settlement Agreement.

8. Both the appeals are disposed of as settled in above terms.

9. The suit CS(COMM) 861/2025 shall stand decreed.

10. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly.

11. In terms of Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 full Court fee is directed to be refunded to the Appellants.

12. Let this order be communicated to the ld. District Judge, (Commercial Court)-03. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. VIKAS MAHAJAN, J. AUGUST 11, 2026 nsa/msh

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead