01Facts
The connected writ appeals arose between M/s Shrishrimal Plantation Ltd., M/s Arihant Vardhman Biotech, State Bank of India, and other parties concerning disputes not otherwise elaborated upon in the judgment.
In W.A. No. 170 of 2025, the appellant, M/s Arihant Vardhman Biotech, stated that it had amicably resolved its dispute with respondent No. 2, M/s Shrishrimal Plantation Ltd., and sought withdrawal of the appeal through I.A. No. 4 of 2026.
¶ 3In W.A. Nos. 59 and 72 of 2025, the appellant stated that its dispute with respondent No. 1 had also been amicably settled pursuant to a settlement deed dated 05.08.2026 and sought appropriate directions through I.A. No. 3 of 2026.
¶ 5The appellant in W.A. Nos. 59 and 72 of 2025 was unrepresented when the matters were heard, although its counsel had filed the applications.
¶ 1 · ¶ 502Issues
i.Whether W.A. No. 170 of 2025 should be permitted to be withdrawn in view of the parties’ amicable settlement?
¶ 3–4ii.Whether W.A. Nos. 59 and 72 of 2025 should be disposed of in terms of the settlement deed dated 05.08.2026?
¶ 5–703Law Applied
The Court applied the general procedural principle that a litigant may withdraw an appeal where the dispute has been amicably resolved, subject to the Court permitting such withdrawal.
¶ 3–4It further applied the principle that, upon being satisfied regarding a settlement between the parties, the Court may allow an interlocutory application seeking appropriate directions and dispose of the pending proceedings in terms of the settlement.
¶ 5–704Reasoning
In W.A. No. 170 of 2025, the appellant expressly stated that the dispute with respondent No. 2 had been amicably resolved and that it no longer wished to prosecute the appeal. On that basis, the Court allowed I.A. No. 4 of 2026 and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
¶ 3–4In W.A. Nos. 59 and 72 of 2025, the Court took note of the settlement deed dated 05.08.2026 between the concerned parties and the prayer made in I.A. No. 3 of 2026. Finding the applications deserving of acceptance in view of the settlement, the Court allowed them and directed that the appeals be disposed of in accordance with the settlement deed.
¶ 5–705Holding
I.A. No. 4 of 2026 was allowed, and W.A. No. 170 of 2025 was dismissed as withdrawn.
¶ 4I.A. No. 3 of 2026 in W.A. Nos. 59 and 72 of 2025 was allowed, and both appeals were disposed of in terms of the settlement deed dated 05.08.2026.
¶ 6–7The settlement deed was directed to form part of the record.
¶ 8Original Court PDF
M/s Shrishrimal Plantation Ltd.vsM/S ARIHANT VARDHMAN BIOTECH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
