JUDGMENT Mr. Sanjay Kishan Kaul, C.J. (Oral):- Heard learned counsels for the parties. 2. The attention of this Court has been drawn to the final bill raised by the petitioner (Annexure R-4 page 123), in terms whereof total amount demanded was Rs. 1,64,36,867/-. The break up of this amount is as under:- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Final bill amount 1,14,10,953/-. Increase amount of raw material 35,25,914/- Security deposit 15,00,000/- Total 1,64,36,867/- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. The aforesaid bill was opposed and settled at Rs. 1,03,000,00/- on 18.09.2012 as signed by both the parties stating that the balance payment left is of Rs. 30 lacs which would be paid on 30.09.2012. There are two endorsements made on this letter thereafter showing receipts of Rs. 10 lacs each totaling to Rs. 20 lacs on 12.10.2012 leaving a balance of Rs. 10 lacs. This amount of Rs. 10 lacs has not been paid. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to rake up the issue of the balance final bill and increased amount towards raw material which fact formed a part of settlement. Once there is a full accord and satisfaction, in my view, a party cannot be permitted to keep on racking up the issue again and again. This matter is no more res-integra in view of authoritative judicial pronouncements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Court. 5. In Arbitration Case No. 8 of 2013 titled as M/s Satish Aggarwal Vs. Union of India and others decided on 15.11.2013, various judicial pronouncements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court have been discussed to come to the conclusion that once there is full accord and satisfaction and there is no challenge laid on account of fraud, coercion, duress and undue influence, the settlement cannot be waived away. Infact it was observed in Union of India and others Vs. M/s Master Construction Co., [2011(4) Law Herald (SC) 2982], that a bald plea of fraud, coercion, duress or undue influence is not enough and the party who sets up such plea must prima-facie establish the same by placing material before the Court to substantiate this plea qua the ‘No Claim Certificate’ in respect of final payment having been obtained by fraud, coercion or duress. 6. The only document pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner in this behalf is dated 25.10.2012 page 83 which is much after the settlement arrived at and even payments have been made pursuant thereto. 6. The only document pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner in this behalf is dated 25.10.2012 page 83 which is much after the settlement arrived at and even payments have been made pursuant thereto. All that this letter states that there was tightness in the flow of funds in the business and thus the petitioner had to accept an arbitrary reduction in the bill. This is thus a secured business decision rather than any issue of fraud, force or coercion. Thus, there is no reason to doubt that the final accord and satisfaction took place as per the terms set out in the letter dated 16.04.2012. 7. In so far as refund of security deposit is concerned, the same forms part of the final accord and satisfaction as it has been mentioned in the amount table in the letter dated 16.04.2012. The result of the aforesaid is that only an amount of Rs. 10 lacs remains outstanding from the respondent to the petitioner. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent states that due to intermediate occurrence of the management of the society being superseded, the Administrator being appointed and then restoration of the earlier management, this payment could not be made. He does not disputed this amount of Rs. 10 lacs. However, amount has remained outstanding beyond 30.09.2012 and thus learned counsel for the respondent states that reasonable interest can be paid on this amount. 9. The amount of Rs. 10 lacs be paid to the petitioner alongwith simple interest @ 12% per annum from 01.10.2012 till the date of payment and needful be done within one month from today. 10. The aforesaid thus does not leave any dispute to be adjudicated upon and accordingly the petition stands disposed of.