2018 (10) TMI 1458 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Chit transactions - According to the settlement, the fourth respondent has paid a sum of ₹ 50,000/- for the chit amount due to the petitioner for all the three chit transactions, which triggered three orders passed by the first respondent - Held that - Since the said settlement reached between the parties, i.e., the petitioner and the fourth respondent, the same has been reduced into writing by way of compromise memo. In view of the settlement reached between the parties, by which the issue has been completely settled between the petitioner and the contesting fourth respondent as full and final settlement, there is no further issue for adjudication in these cases.

Summary

Issues:
- Writ petitions seeking certiorarified mandamus to quash orders made by the government in commercial tax matters.
- Settlement reached between parties during mediation leading to dismissal of writ petitions.

Analysis:
1. The writ petitions (W.P.No.6661, W.P.No.6662, W.P.No.6663 of 2003) were filed to challenge the orders made by the Secretary to Government in Commercial Taxes Department, confirming the orders of the II Respondent in ARC cases. The petitions sought a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash these orders. The petitions were heard by Mr. K.V. Ananthakrushnan for the petitioner, Mr. V. Raja Mohan for the fourth respondent, and Mr. R. Govindaraj for respondents 5 to 7, with Mr. P.P. Purushothaman representing respondents 1 to 3.

2. During the hearing, both sides informed the court that the matter had been referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for settlement. It was reported that a successful conciliation had taken place, resulting in a settlement between the petitioner and the fourth respondent in all three writ petitions. As per the settlement terms, the fourth respondent agreed to pay a sum of ?50,000 for the chit amount due to the petitioner, which was the subject of the orders challenged in the writ petitions.

3. The settlement reached between the parties was documented in a compromise memo dated 12.10.2018. This memo was accepted and made part of the record in all three cases. The settlement was considered a full and final resolution of the issues between the petitioner and the fourth respondent. Consequently, as the matter had been settled, there was no further need for adjudication in the cases.

4. In light of the settlement and the compromise memo, the court dismissed all three writ petitions. The dismissal was based on the fact that the parties had resolved the disputes through mediation, rendering the petitions unnecessary. The court also ruled that there would be no order as to costs in this matter.