Disposed

M/S.Vaidya Patwardhan and Co. v. M/S. Sandu Products (Halol) and 3 Ors. and Ghanshyam Shankar Sandu

Bombay HC5 Feb 2009CHS/810/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an execution application regarding a special civil suit, the High Court disposed of a chamber summons by ordering relief in terms of a consent settlement entered into between the decree-holder, respondents, and applicant. The terms involved the conveyance of land as an asset of the respondents to satisfy the decree. The court took the signed consent terms on record and disposed of the matter ac

What did the court decide?

Chamber summons disposed of in terms of the consent terms; attachment raised subject to terms of consent.

M/S.Vaidya Patwardhan and Co. Vs M/S. Sandu Products… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 810 OF 2008

¶5

in

¶6

 EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 129 OF 2007

¶7

IN

¶8

 VADODRA SPECIAL CIVIL SUIT NO. 1018 OF 1993

¶9

 M/s.Vaidya Patwardhan & Co. ...Plaintiff

¶10

Vs.

¶11

 M/s. Sandu Products (Halol). ...Defendants

¶12

And

¶13

 Ghanshyam Shankar Sandu ...Applicant

¶14

 Mr. J.B.Patel for the Decree-holder.

¶15

 Mr. P.G.Lad for defendants.

¶16

 Dr. Dattapasad Patwardhan - Partner of Plaintiffs
 prwesent in person.

¶17

 Mr. Sandeep Gurav, C.a. of Defendants present in

¶18

 person.

¶19

 Mr. G.S.Sandu - Applicant present in person.

¶20

CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J.

¶21

 DATE: 5th February, 2009.

¶22

P.C.

¶23

¶24

 . This Chamber Summons was adjourned from time to
 time to enable the parties to settle the dispute.

¶25

 2. Now, it is reported that consent terms have been
 entered into between the decree-holder, the plaintiffs,
 the defendants and the applicant. It is stated that the
 applicant’s Chamber Summons can be allowed and the
 attachment be raised subject to what is recorded in the
 consent terms.

¶26

 3. The consent terms record arrangement between the
 Plaintiffs, Defendants and the Applicant not only in
 respect of the Vadodara Civil Suit No.1018 of 1993 in
 which the subject decree has been passed, but several
 other litigation and proceedings. It is agreed that the
 land mentioned in clause 2 of the consent terms is an
 asset of the 1st defendant firm and the plaintiffs and
 the defendants were the partners thereof. This land
 will be conveyed in favour of the plaintiffs and one
 M/s.Ayurlab Pharmaceuticals in terms of clause 3.
 Thereafter, the decree passed in the Special Civil Suit
 shall stand fully satisfied and will be marked
 accordingly. All the defendants have filed their

¶27

 individual affidavits which are annexed to the consent
 terms accepting this arrangement and agreeing to
 transfer and convey the property. The plaintiffs have

¶28

¶29

 deposited a sum which is to be retained as an escrow
 amount subject to compliance of other terms now agreed
 by the parties.

¶30

 4. The consent terms are duly signed by the
 Constituted Attorney of the defendants and the
 plaintiffs so also the applicant. Their respective
 Advocates have also signed them. The parties state that
 they have understood the implications and the
 consequences flowing from these terms. The terms are
 arrived at and filed willingly and without any force or
 pressure. The terms fully record the agreement and
 arrangement arrived at by them. The partner of the
 plaintiffs is present in Court. The defendants’
 Constituted Attorney and the applicant is also present
 in Court.

¶31

 5. In their presence, these consent terms are taken
 on record and marked "X" for identification. Order in
 terms of the consent terms. The statements made in the
 affidavit including the undertaking in clauses 6 and 9
 are accepted.

¶32

 Chamber Summons disposed of accordingly.

¶33

¶34

 (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J.)

M/S.Vaidya Patwardhan and Co. v. M/S. Sandu Products (Halol) and 3 Ors. and Ghanshyam Shankar Sandu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Vaidya Patwardhan and Co. v. M/S. Sandu Products (Halol) and 3 Ors. and Ghanshyam Shankar Sandu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binaifer Xerxes Randeria Vs Xerxes Kurush Randeria

Miss Norma Carneio Alphonso and Anr. Vs Dr.Kenneth Carneiro Alphonso

Jayantilal Purnamal Agrawal and 19 Ors. Vs Mrs. Smiley Gonsalves and 8 Ors.

Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Ltd. Vs the Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. and 2 Ors.

Icici Bank Ltd. Vs Maheshwari Mills Ltd. and Ors.

saroj prakash mahadik Vs venketesh r. shetye and Ors.