#settlement

The Delhi High Court held that counsel’s settlement statements bind the client, barring Equitas Small Finance Bank from reviving a dismissed NI Act complaint and upholding advocate-client ties and Lok Adalat finality.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that when parties settle a Section 138 NI Act complaint, the related proclamation and FIR under Section 290 BNS must be dismissed, resulting in the FIR's quash. This prevents further criminal prosecution once the principal dispute is resolved, safeguarding litigants who reach settlement.

The Supreme Court ruled that a criminal case can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC only when the victim himself settles the dispute, rejecting the notion that a third party can seek quash. This distinction separates compounding from quashing and limits judicial interference to victim-initiated settlements, affecting litigants and prosecutors in pending criminal matters.

MP High Court quashes FIR for cheating and forgery after parties settled the dispute via a sale deed and civil suit dismissal, reinforcing that criminal proceedings can be terminated if the underlying civil dispute is resolved. The ruling underscores the court's power to prevent abuse of process where no public interest is served.

Madhya Pradesh High Court reaffirms that parties settling disputes amicably outside court are entitled to a full refund of court fees under Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870, regardless of whether Section 89 of the CPC was invoked. The ruling clarifies that the refund is a statutory right, not contingent on procedural formalities, ensuring cost relief for litigants opting for alternative dispute resolution.

Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that Lok Adalat cannot dispose of a writ petition as infructuous if no actual settlement exists between parties, reinforcing procedural integrity.