CS(OS)/814/2001 of MANDDEP SINGH Vs STATE on 24 April 2001

Sr. No.DateOrders

total of Rs.24 lacs ^all be deposited with the UTl Bank, Lajpat Nagar and thesaid amount shall be retained in fixed deposit till majority of defendantsNos.2(b) and 2(c).By dqjosit of the additional amount, in ny view, interestsof the two minors are aifficientlyprotected.Even otherwisedefendantNo.2(a) being the mother and natural guardian has no interests adverse to that of minors.The applicationis allowed aibject to defendant No.2(a) filing aphotocopyof die fixed deposit receipt of Rs.l2 lacs each in die name of twominors Ms.Mdiar KoWi and Master Sumer Kohli.

S.2391/93& lA 6930A)3

i

StatenKntsof die parties have been separately recorded.Thecoiiq)romiseapplication. ExhibitC1 is signed by the jmrtiesand their respectivecounsel. The plaintiff and defendants Nos,3 & 4 have received a sum of Rs.10lacs each in terms of die settlement and do not claim any interest or share inthe suit property. The parties shall be bound by die terms of the settlement, asrecorded in Exhibit Cl.Defendant No.2(a) has entered into a settlement onbdialf of herself and her two minor children.A sum of Rs.24 lacs has beendirectedto be keptfor die minorsin fixed deposittill their majority. Thesuit isdecreedin terms of ExhibitCL The mere factum of die aiit being decreedinterms of ExhibitCl siiall not tantamountto waiver or dischargefrom liatalityfor payment of any statutory duty, levies or taxesetc.The suit anddie applicationstanddecidedof accordingly.

nmohan Sann,