Allahabad High Court

the counsels, detailed settlement was arrived at in between the parties and duly recorded in the order dated August 22, 2025. Prior to the said order being passed, extensive talks for settlement took place on two occasions in the Chamber, where both the lawyers were present. In the presence of the lawyers, the terms for settlement were agreed and were reduced in writing as are evident in the order dated 22nd August, 2025. Today when the matter was listed, four affidavits have been filed on behalf of Shri Harish Suri, Shri Gaurav Suri, Smt. Praveen Bashin and Smt. Pramod Bahri in terms of the directions contained in the order 22nd August, 2025.

3. Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate was appearing for Dr. Sushil Suri. After obtaining an NOC, he wants to pursue the matter in person and has filed an affidavit today in the Court. In the said affidavit, unsubstantiated and scandalous allegations have been made in Para Nos.a, b, c and d of the affidavit, which are as under:- "a. That the instant Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is nothing but an abuse of the process of law which has been filed simply to 2 A227 No. 4238 of 2025 waste judicial time and exert unnecessary pressure on the Ld. Court Below. In the past as well, Mr. Harish Suri has filed such A227 petition which has been dismissed in-limine such as dismissal Order dated

19.04.2019 passed by another bench of this Hon'ble High Court in Misc. Single No. 11273 of 2019. This important and relevant dismissal Order dated 19.04.2019 has been deliberately suppressed and concealed by the Counsel of Petitioner in the instant Petition drafted and filed by her for the Petitioner. b. That previously also this Hon'ble Court had passed an Order dated

19.11.2024 in Matters under Article 227 No. 5475 of 2024 wherein neither any copy of the petition nor prior intimation was given by the same Petitioner to the OP No. 2 about the filing/listing of the matter and nor did the Hon'ble Court directed issuance of Notice to the OP No.2 herein. This Hon'ble Court had proceeded to allow the said Petition ex- parte and furthermore had passed the following direction: 'The Senior Registrar of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 43, Lucknow. The respondent no. 1 shall also submit quarterly report with regard to the progress of the suit to the Senior Registrar, which shall be placed before this Court.' c. That it is quite strange that this Hon'ble Court directed Ld. Trial Court Judge to file quarterly reports when there are express judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court highlighting that Higher Courts must avoid fixing timelines for the Trial Courts unless there is some grave urgency in exceptional cases and such urgency must clearly reflect from the Order as well. However, keeping the dignity and majesty of the Hon'ble Court in mind, O.P. No. 2 did not avail any legal remedies against passing of an ex-parte Order. It may be noted that violation of principles of natural justice goes to the root of the matter. d. That Opposite Party No.2 is completely appalled to see that this Hon'ble Court has passed a Final Judgment dated 22.08.2025 in the instant matter wherein the Hon'ble Court has wrongly and incorrectly observed that the Parties have consensually settled all the disputes. In the 3 A227 No. 4238 of 2025 beginning itself, the Opposite Party No.2 was not comfortable in the 'In- Chamber proceedings' as such proceedings lack transparency."

4. The proceedings which took place in the presence of both the parties' counsels and the parties have been denied as is evident from para No.e of the affidavit, which is as under: "That it is put forth that the terms and conditions of compromise as mentioned in the Final Judgment dated 22.08.2025 are wholly incorrect and wrong and as such the Judgment dated 22.08.2025 has been passed solely for the purpose of facilitating and enabling the Petitioner to unilaterally dispose of/mortgage one of the property in dispute, over which there is a Stay Order granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court i.e. Order dated 14.09.2016 passed in SLP (Civil) No. 25771 of 2016."

5. Allegations with regard to the infirmities contained in the order have been alleged in Para No.f, which is as under: "That furthermore, there are various infirmities in the Judgment dated

22.08.2025 such as the date of the Supreme Court Order is not mentioned in Para 11 of the Judgment. Similarly, the case number of the SLP has been incorrectly mentio mentioned in the same paragraph. Instead of SLP (Civil) No. 25771 of 2016, the Hon'ble Court has mentioned SLP (Civil) No. 18771 of 2017."

6. Surprisingly, in Para No.g of the affidavit, the following administrative and the same has been sworn on the basis of the information received and believed to be true without disclosing the source of information, which is as under: "That the last proposal which was discussed and agreed in the presence of No.2 was that Harish Suri had agreed to pay Rs. 25 crores (Rs.25,00,00,000/-) in lieu of selling one property i.e. Khasra Plot No. 11/CP-1 situated at Sector 11, Vikas Nagar, Lucknow. Furthermore, to show his bona-fides, it was agreed that Harish Suri shall immediately deposit Rs. 7,00,00,000/- (Rs. 7 Crores) before Hon'ble Court which shall be immediately released in favour of Opposite Party No.2/Dr. Sushil Suri. It was agreed that the remainder of Rs. 18,00,00,000/- (Rs 18 Crores) 4 A227 No. 4238 of 2025 shall be paid by Harish Suri to Dr. Sushil Suri before Hon'ble Court on or before the expiry of 4 months from the date of the said Judgment dated

22.08.2025. Opposite Party No.2/Sushil Suri has not mentioned the terms and conditions qua Pravesh Kumari Grover in. other contesting party as it is for her to put forth her case."

7. Instead of filing a simple affidavit indicating the unwillingness for compromise, in sum and substance, unsubstantiated allegations have been levelled.

8. Similarly, instead of filing a simple affidavit showing her unwillingness for compromise, an affidavit has been filed along with an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC by Smt. Pravesh Kumari Grover seeking impleadment in the petition.

9. In Para No.g of the said affidavit, she has disclosed as under: "That it has come to the knowledge of the Applicant/Impleading Party that this Hon'ble Court has pronounced a final judgment on 22.08.2025 whereby it is mentioned that Applicant/Impleading Party/Pravesh Kumari Grover has consented to compromise the dispute in lieu of receiving Rs. 80 lakhs from Harish Suri. It is put forth that Applicant/Impleading Party- Pravesh Kumari Grover is completely appalled and shocked to see that this Hon'ble Court has passed a Final Judgment dated 22.08.2025 in the instant matter wherein the Hon'ble Court has wrongly and incorrectly observed that the Parties have consensually settled all the disputes. In the beginning itself, the Applicant/Impleading Party was not comfortable in the 'In-Chamber proceedings' as such proceedings lack transparency especially when the aspect of bias is also present."

10. Once again, Para No.g has been sworn on the basis of the information received and believed to be correct without disclosing the source of the information.

11. Scandalous allegations have also been levelled in Para No.h, which is as under and surprisingly, the Para No.h has not even been sworn in the affidavit: 5 A227 No. 4238 of 2025 "That it is put forth that the terms and conditions of compromise as mentioned in the Final Judgment dated 22.08.2025 are wholly incorrect and wrong and as such the Judgment dated 22.08.2025 has been passed solely for the purpose of facilitating and enabling the Petitioner/Harish Suri to unilaterally dispose of/mortgage one of the property in dispute, over which there is a Stay Order granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court i.e. Order dated 14.09.2016 passed in SLP (Civil) No. 25771 of 2016 and SLP (Civil) No. 26591 of 2016. It may be noted that Applicant herein/Impleading Party/Pravesh Kumari Grover is the Petitioner in SLP (Civil) No. 26591 of 2016."

12. Considering the attitude of Dr. Suri, who was present along with his counsel during the entire sessions of compromise and Smt. Pravesh Kumari Grover with whom both the brothers had telephonic conversation in the presence of their lawyer and the manner in which they have filed the affidavits, it is clear that the compromise in between the parties as was agreed and recorded in the order dated 22nd August, 2025, does not appear to be bearing fruit.

13. As regards the affidavits, this Court can only pray that forgive them Lord as they know not what they say. As such, heard the parties on merits.

14. Heard Ms. Nandita Bharti, learned counsel for the petitioner on merits, Dr. Shushil Suri and Smt. Pravesh Kumari Grover, who are appearing in person.

15. The present petition has been filed for following prayers: "A. direct the opposite party No.1 to expedite the hearing and dispose of the Application dated 04-03-2025 filed by the Defendant No.3-Pravesh Kumari Grover in Suit No. 342/2015 (Dr Sushil Suri vs Harish Suri And Others) connected alongwith 1364 of 2012 within a stipulated time as may be directed by this Hon'ble Court. B. to permit the petitioner to sell any one of the following suit properties - Khasra Plot No. CP-1/11, Vikas Nagar, Lko.OR Land measuring 11032 sq. ft of Khasra Plot No.146 and 147, Ghazipur(Now Indiranagar), 6 A227 No. 4238 of 2025 Lko.specified in Para-14 of the Petition and to hand over the Demand Draft of agreed sum of 3.5 Crores or as may be directed by this Hon'ble Court, to the O.P No.2 immediately thereafter, before this Hon'ble Court."

16. It is argued during the course of petition that prayer-A has already been decided. Prayer-B also does not survive. As such, the matter is rendered infructuous and no directions are required.

17. It is clarified that none of the parties shall be bound by the terms which were recorded in the order 22.08.2025 and the parties would be at liberty to take such steps as are advised to protect their rights.

18. The petition stands dismissed. August 29, 2025 Ashutosh (Pankaj Bhatia,J.)

the counsels, detailed settlement was arrived at in between the parties and duly recorded in the order dated August 22, 2025. Prior to the said order being passed, extensive talks for settlement took place on two occasions in the Chamber, where both the lawyers were present. In the presence of the lawyers, the terms for settlement were agreed and were reduced in writing as are evident in the order dated 22nd August, 2025. Today when the matter was listed, four affidavits have been filed on behalf of Shri Harish Suri, Shri Gaurav Suri, Smt. Praveen Bashin and Smt. Pramod Bahri in terms of the directions contained in the order 22nd August, 2025.

3. Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate was appearing for Dr. Sushil Suri. After obtaining an NOC, he wants to pursue the matter in person and has filed an affidavit today in the Court. In the said affidavit, unsubstantiated and scandalous allegations have been made in Para Nos.a, b, c and d of the affidavit, which are as under:- "a. That the instant Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is nothing but an abuse of the process of law which has been filed simply to 2 A227 No. 4238 of 2025 waste judicial time and exert unnecessary pressure on the Ld. Court Below. In the past as well, Mr. Harish Suri has filed such A227 petition which has been dismissed in-limine such as dismissal Order dated

19.04.2019 passed by another bench of this Hon'ble High Court in Misc. Single No. 11273 of 2019. This important and relevant dismissal Order dated 19.04.2019 has been deliberately suppressed and concealed by the Counsel of Petitioner in the instant Petition drafted and filed by her for the Petitioner. b. That previously also this Hon'ble Court had passed an Order dated

19.11.2024 in Matters under Article 227 No. 5475 of 2024 wherein neither any copy of the petition nor prior intimation was given by the same Petitioner to the OP No. 2 about the filing/listing of the matter and nor did the Hon'ble Court directed issuance of Notice to the OP No.2 herein. This Hon'ble Court had proceeded to allow the said Petition ex- parte and furthermore had passed the following direction: 'The Senior Registrar of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 43, Lucknow. The respondent no. 1 shall also submit quarterly report with regard to the progress of the suit to the Senior Registrar, which shall be placed before this Court.' c. That it is quite strange that this Hon'ble Court directed Ld. Trial Court Judge to file quarterly reports when there are express judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court highlighting that Higher Courts must avoid fixing timelines for the Trial Courts unless there is some grave urgency in exceptional cases and such urgency must clearly reflect from the Order as well. However, keeping the dignity and majesty of the Hon'ble Court in mind, O.P. No. 2 did not avail any legal remedies against passing of an ex-parte Order. It may be noted that violation of principles of natural justice goes to the root of the matter. d. That Opposite Party No.2 is completely appalled to see that this Hon'ble Court has passed a Final Judgment dated 22.08.2025 in the instant matter wherein the Hon'ble Court has wrongly and incorrectly observed that the Parties have consensually settled all the disputes. In the 3 A227 No. 4238 of 2025 beginning itself, the Opposite Party No.2 was not comfortable in the 'In- Chamber proceedings' as such proceedings lack transparency."

4. The proceedings which took place in the presence of both the parties' counsels and the parties have been denied as is evident from para No.e of the affidavit, which is as under: "That it is put forth that the terms and conditions of compromise as mentioned in the Final Judgment dated 22.08.2025 are wholly incorrect and wrong and as such the Judgment dated 22.08.2025 has been passed solely for the purpose of facilitating and enabling the Petitioner to unilaterally dispose of/mortgage one of the property in dispute, over which there is a Stay Order granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court i.e. Order dated 14.09.2016 passed in SLP (Civil) No. 25771 of 2016."

5. Allegations with regard to the infirmities contained in the order have been alleged in Para No.f, which is as under: "That furthermore, there are various infirmities in the Judgment dated

22.08.2025 such as the date of the Supreme Court Order is not mentioned in Para 11 of the Judgment. Similarly, the case number of the SLP has been incorrectly mentio mentioned in the same paragraph. Instead of SLP (Civil) No. 25771 of 2016, the Hon'ble Court has mentioned SLP (Civil) No. 18771 of 2017."

6. Surprisingly, in Para No.g of the affidavit, the following administrative and the same has been sworn on the basis of the information received and believed to be true without disclosing the source of information, which is as under: "That the last proposal which was discussed and agreed in the presence of No.2 was that Harish Suri had agreed to pay Rs. 25 crores (Rs.25,00,00,000/-) in lieu of selling one property i.e. Khasra Plot No. 11/CP-1 situated at Sector 11, Vikas Nagar, Lucknow. Furthermore, to show his bona-fides, it was agreed that Harish Suri shall immediately deposit Rs. 7,00,00,000/- (Rs. 7 Crores) before Hon'ble Court which shall be immediately released in favour of Opposite Party No.2/Dr. Sushil Suri. It was agreed that the remainder of Rs. 18,00,00,000/- (Rs 18 Crores) 4 A227 No. 4238 of 2025 shall be paid by Harish Suri to Dr. Sushil Suri before Hon'ble Court on or before the expiry of 4 months from the date of the said Judgment dated

22.08.2025. Opposite Party No.2/Sushil Suri has not mentioned the terms and conditions qua Pravesh Kumari Grover in. other contesting party as it is for her to put forth her case."

7. Instead of filing a simple affidavit indicating the unwillingness for compromise, in sum and substance, unsubstantiated allegations have been levelled.

8. Similarly, instead of filing a simple affidavit showing her unwillingness for compromise, an affidavit has been filed along with an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC by Smt. Pravesh Kumari Grover seeking impleadment in the petition.

9. In Para No.g of the said affidavit, she has disclosed as under: "That it has come to the knowledge of the Applicant/Impleading Party that this Hon'ble Court has pronounced a final judgment on 22.08.2025 whereby it is mentioned that Applicant/Impleading Party/Pravesh Kumari Grover has consented to compromise the dispute in lieu of receiving Rs. 80 lakhs from Harish Suri. It is put forth that Applicant/Impleading Party- Pravesh Kumari Grover is completely appalled and shocked to see that this Hon'ble Court has passed a Final Judgment dated 22.08.2025 in the instant matter wherein the Hon'ble Court has wrongly and incorrectly observed that the Parties have consensually settled all the disputes. In the beginning itself, the Applicant/Impleading Party was not comfortable in the 'In-Chamber proceedings' as such proceedings lack transparency especially when the aspect of bias is also present."

10. Once again, Para No.g has been sworn on the basis of the information received and believed to be correct without disclosing the source of the information.

11. Scandalous allegations have also been levelled in Para No.h, which is as under and surprisingly, the Para No.h has not even been sworn in the affidavit: 5 A227 No. 4238 of 2025 "That it is put forth that the terms and conditions of compromise as mentioned in the Final Judgment dated 22.08.2025 are wholly incorrect and wrong and as such the Judgment dated 22.08.2025 has been passed solely for the purpose of facilitating and enabling the Petitioner/Harish Suri to unilaterally dispose of/mortgage one of the property in dispute, over which there is a Stay Order granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court i.e. Order dated 14.09.2016 passed in SLP (Civil) No. 25771 of 2016 and SLP (Civil) No. 26591 of 2016. It may be noted that Applicant herein/Impleading Party/Pravesh Kumari Grover is the Petitioner in SLP (Civil) No. 26591 of 2016."

12. Considering the attitude of Dr. Suri, who was present along with his counsel during the entire sessions of compromise and Smt. Pravesh Kumari Grover with whom both the brothers had telephonic conversation in the presence of their lawyer and the manner in which they have filed the affidavits, it is clear that the compromise in between the parties as was agreed and recorded in the order dated 22nd August, 2025, does not appear to be bearing fruit.

13. As regards the affidavits, this Court can only pray that forgive them Lord as they know not what they say. As such, heard the parties on merits.

14. Heard Ms. Nandita Bharti, learned counsel for the petitioner on merits, Dr. Shushil Suri and Smt. Pravesh Kumari Grover, who are appearing in person.

15. The present petition has been filed for following prayers: "A. direct the opposite party No.1 to expedite the hearing and dispose of the Application dated 04-03-2025 filed by the Defendant No.3-Pravesh Kumari Grover in Suit No. 342/2015 (Dr Sushil Suri vs Harish Suri And Others) connected alongwith 1364 of 2012 within a stipulated time as may be directed by this Hon'ble Court. B. to permit the petitioner to sell any one of the following suit properties - Khasra Plot No. CP-1/11, Vikas Nagar, Lko.OR Land measuring 11032 sq. ft of Khasra Plot No.146 and 147, Ghazipur(Now Indiranagar), 6 A227 No. 4238 of 2025 Lko.specified in Para-14 of the Petition and to hand over the Demand Draft of agreed sum of 3.5 Crores or as may be directed by this Hon'ble Court, to the O.P No.2 immediately thereafter, before this Hon'ble Court."

16. It is argued during the course of petition that prayer-A has already been decided. Prayer-B also does not survive. As such, the matter is rendered infructuous and no directions are required.

17. It is clarified that none of the parties shall be bound by the terms which were recorded in the order 22.08.2025 and the parties would be at liberty to take such steps as are advised to protect their rights.

18. The petition stands dismissed. August 29, 2025 Ashutosh (Pankaj Bhatia,J.)