This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
ssm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SECOND APPEAL NO. 958 OF 2005
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda
of Coram, appearances, Court’s
Orders or directions and
Registrar’s OrdersCourt’s or Judge’s Orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.Shriram S.Kulkarni for the
appellants.
Mr. D.B.Loankar for respondent
Nos. 2 and 3.
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.
DATED : 4th September, 2007.
P.C.
1. The parties have arrived to
settle the matter and therefore
filed the consent terms, marked
"X" and taken on record. It is
signed by both the advocates and
respective parties. There is no
dispute about the contends and
identification and signatures of
the respective parties.
Respondent No.2 Aparna Shashikant
Vaidya is after marriage Aparna
Anirudhha Oak (Vaidya). The
present consent terms has been
( 2 )
signed in her earlier name. The
parties have no objection of any
kind to this also.
c
2. This court has already in
other connected matters between
the appellants and others,
disposed of in second appeals, as
they have compromised as recorded
above.
3. In view of this settlement,
the present second appeal is also
disposed of in view of the
consent terms.
[ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.]
Appellants
Aparna Shashikant Vaidya
Anoop V. Mohta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court