The High Court dismissed a second appeal where the appellants and respondents reached a settlement and filed a consent term before the Court.
The second appeal was disposed of based on the filed consent term and settlement.
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.
Lsp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SECOND APPEAL NO.967 OF 2005
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders
Court’s or Judge’s order
Mr. S. S.Kulkarni for the Appellant Mr.D.B.Lonkar for the Respondents
CORAM:- Anoop V. Mohta, J
DATED:- 12th September, 2007
P.C.
| . | Parties | have r | eached | a | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| settlement | and | accordingly | |||
| filed a |
consent | term | dated |
||
| 12-9-2007 | signed | by | the | ||
| Appellants | and | Respondents | |||
| along | with | their | respective | ||
| Advocates. | There | is | no | dispute |
|
| about the | sign | ature, |
identification and authorisation by any side. 2. The consent term marked ’X’ is taken on record. 3. The Appellants have already settled the dispute and reached a compromise. The parties are present in the Court. In view of this
settlement, the present Second Appeal is disposed off.
(Anoop V.Mohta, J)
Appellants
Respondents
Anoop V. Mohta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
