TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 1153
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ered is J R Organics Ltd of which the appellants as well as the third and fourth respondents are Directors. The reference, admittedly, was registered at the behest of the appellants. Winding up proceedings had been instituted against the company by Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd3. An order was passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 15 February 2011 rejecting an application of the creditor in the petition for winding up, for withdrawal of the company petition. Instead and in place of the original creditor, the learned Single Judge permitted the transposition of Somaiya Organics Employees Union, Barabanki as the applicant for pursuing the petition for winding up. A company appeal was filed against the order of the learned Single Judge4. By an order dated 21 November 2011, the Division Bench noted that counsel for the parties had agreed to attempt a solution by entering into negotiations. The Division Bench referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court at Lucknow where the representatives of the workmen and the management were permitted to appear together with the creditors. On 4 January 2013, the Division Bench noted that a settlement agreement had ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... learned Single Judge, a preliminary objection was raised to its maintainability, inter alia, on the ground that since the order of the Division Bench dated 4 January 2013 had been passed in a company appeal, the order had to be executed and enforced in accordance with the provisions of Section 634 of the Companies Act, 19565. The learned Single Judge rejected the preliminary objection with the following observations: "...No doubt the order has been passed by Division Bench in company appeal. In the present case, High Court has been actively involved in getting this matter solved. In the present case, the parties have themselves agreed to go to mediation and conciliation center. The said centre is part of High Court and is situated inside the campus of High Court. There is a supervisory committee of five High Court Judges which looks after the mediation process. Once the parties have themselves requested the Court to send their matter to mediation centre, actively participated in the mediation, reached an agreement, reported the matter to the High Court and finally the Court has made the agreement part of the judgment, it cannot be said that violation of this Court's order can....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y be regarded as a judgment but only those orders would constitute judgments which decide matters of moment or affect vital and valuable rights of the parties and which work serious injustice to the parties concerned8. In a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Prof Y C Simhadri, Vice Chancellor, BHU Vs Deen Bandhu Pathak9, it has been held that where a learned Single Judge has exercised jurisdiction not vested in him, an order concerning the jurisdiction to entertain a contempt proceeding would fall within the definition of the expression 'judgment' and would be appealable. Such an order, it has been held, would affect the rights of the appellant and by causing injustice to him, could form the subject matter of a special appeal. In the present case, the learned Single Judge has overruled the objection of the appellants to the maintainability of the contempt petition. The decision holding the contempt petition to be maintainable has the trappings of a judgment because it finally and conclusively decides the issue in regard to the maintainability of such a petition invoking the contempt jurisdiction. The special appeal would, therefore, be maintainable. On merits, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has been arrived at, the court shall decide the question; but no adjournment shall be granted for the purpose of deciding the question, unless the court, for reasons to be recorded, thinks fit to grant such adjournment. Explanation : An agreement or compromise which is void or avoidable under the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (9 of 1872), shall not be deemed to be lawful within the meaning of this rule. A mediated settlement, upon the passing of a judicial order in terms of the settlement, has the effect of a decree of the Court. As a decree, the terms of the settlement are enforceable and executable in accordance with the process known to law. A decree for the payment of money is capable of being executed in the manner indicated by the provisions contained in Order XXI of CPC. Rules 1 and 2 of Order XXI provide for the mode of paying money under a decree and for the payment out of Court to a decree holder. Consequently, where a settlement agreement which has been arrived at between the parties is embodied in a final order or decree of the Court, the remedy of a party which is aggrieved by the non-payment of sums due and payable under it is to enforce and execute the decree in accord....