Aristo Realty Developers Ltd. Vs Gopi Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Cin No. U55100MH1986PTC040749

Parties to the petition settled their dispute amicably and have filed consent terms. The Petitioner has agreed to accept from the Respondent an amount of Rs.23,94,384/- in five instalments towards full and final settlement of all its claims. The Respondent has also agreed to pay to the Petitioner in five installments the said amount in a manner set out in paragraph 1 of consent terms. In paragraph 3, the Respondent has given undertaking regarding 5 post dated cheques given towards five installments and further undertaking to this Court to

¶10

1 / 2

¶11

patilsr

¶12

honour the said cheques. Undertaking is accepted. In paragraph 6, parties have agreed that in the event Respondent commits a default in honouring cheque, the petition shall stand admitted and consequences thereof will follow.

¶13

Consent terms are signed by the Director of the Petitioner and the authorised signatory of Respondent alongwith their respective advocates. The Director of the Petitioner- company as well as the authorised signatory of the Respondent are present in Court. Upon specific query, they submitted that consent terms are drawn up as per their instructions. They requested for disposal of petition in terms of consent terms. Consent terms are taken on record and marked “X” for identification. Company petition is disposed of in terms of consent terms.

¶14

(RANJIT MORE, J.)

¶15

2 / 2

¶16

patilsr

Aristo Realty Developers Ltd. v. Gopi Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Cin No. U55100MH1986PTC040749

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aristo Realty Developers Ltd. v. Gopi Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Cin No. U55100MH1986PTC040749

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

Smt. Surekha Nana Kale and Ors. Vs the Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority and Anr.

Priti Pandhari Sawant and Ors. Vs Slum Rehabilitation Authority and Ors.

Kohinoor Mills, a Unit of National Textile Corporation (Nm) Ltd. Vs Jayavantibai Pandurang Sakpal and 4 Ors.

Adarsh Kamgar Sabha through Harish K. Amin, General Secretary and 16 Ors. Vs Official Liquidator of Zadona Electronics (in Liqn.), High Court, Bombay

M/S.Aafloat Textiles(India) Ltd. Vs the Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay for Pal Peugeot Ltd. (in Liqn.)

Sanat Bhattacharya Vs Official Liquidator of Arc-Tec Systems Limited (in Liqn) and Anr.