Authority: Supreme Court of India (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)

Order Date: 22 September 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Appellant – Suresh Kothari; Respondent – Kishin T. Panjabi.
  • Civil Appeal No.: 9146 of 2019 (Suresh Kothari Vs. Kishin T. Panjabi).
  • Impugned Order: Conviction of the appellant under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 with a sentence of two months simple imprisonment, a fine of Rs 2,000 and a default sentence of one month, and an order to remove a construction on the second‑floor terrace.
  • Litigation History:
  • OS No.10415/2015 filed in the Additional City Civil and Sessions Court, Bangalore, seeking injunction against the appellant and rectification of a sale deed dated 28‑09‑2015.
  • First appeal before the Karnataka High Court; MFA No.7719/2016 resulted in status‑quo orders dated 09‑02‑2017 and 08‑06‑2017 restricting construction.
  • CCC No.2047/2017 filed by the respondent leading to the impugned contempt order.
  • Settlement Deed: Dated 29‑08‑2026, containing 14 pages, signed digitally by Vishal Anand.

1. All disputes, claims, counter‑claims arising from the Sale Deed (28‑09‑2015) and the properties listed in Schedules A, B, C of the suit are amicably settled.

2. Joint steps to:

a) Dispose of the pending Supreme Court appeal (Civil Appeal No.9146/2019) as per the settlement.

b) Withdraw MFA No.6323/2016 and MFA No.7719/2016 pending before the Karnataka High Court.

c) Withdraw/dispose OS No.10415/2015 pending before the Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore.

3. Both parties irrevocably waive all present claims, demands, actions, causes of action and proceedings against each other.

4. The second party will not insist on removal of the rolling shutter in the common passage of the first‑floor Schedule B property; the first party will provide access to the second party to that common area.

5. Both parties acknowledge that the Sale Deed (Document No.2669/2015‑16, dated 28‑09‑2015) executed in favour of M/s Kothari Associates requires no rectification.

6. All disputes concerning construction, terrace rights, common passages, staircase, water connection and other common facilities are finally resolved.

7. Parties undertake to faithfully comply with the settlement terms and execute necessary documents.

8. The settlement is entered into without any admission of allegations; all prior negotiations are superseded.

9. The settlement binds the parties, their legal heirs, successors, representatives and assigns.

10. Any application for implementation shall be made before the competent court where the proceedings are pending.

Final Outcome

  • The Supreme Court orders the appeal to stand disposed of in accordance with the signed settlement.
  • All pending applications, if any, are rejected.
  • Regarding the contempt conviction, the Court upholds the finding of contempt but sets aside the imprisonment; the appellant is required to pay a fine of Rs 2,000 into the Registry of the High Court within one month from the order date.
  • The earlier direction to remove the construction on the terrace is superseded by the settlement terms.
  • The parties are directed to produce this order before the appropriate courts to effect the withdrawals and disposals as agreed.

Topics: Settlement, Contempt of Courts Act, Property Dispute