Disposed

Pawankumar Arya and 5 Ors. v. Ravikumar Arya and 9 Ors.

Bombay HC14 Aug 2015S/740/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A settled suit regarding the allotment of flats in a redevelopment project. The suit was withdrawn against specific defendants, and the remaining matter was disposed of in accordance with signed consent terms marking a full discharge of obligations.

What did the court decide?

Suit disposed of in accordance with consent terms; suit withdrawn against defendants 9 and 10; decree to be drawn up.

Pawankumar Arya and 5 Ors. Vs Ravikumar Arya and 9 Ors. — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

904-SL194-15.DOC

¶2

Atul

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT (L) NO. 194 OF 2015 WITH

¶4

NOTICE OF MOTION (L) NO. 551 OF 2015

¶5

Pawankumar Arya & 5 Ors.
Versus
Ravikumar Arya & 9 Ors.

¶6

…Plaintiffs

¶7

…Defendants

¶8

Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Jeejeebhoy &
Mr. Vivek Vashi, i/b Bharucha & Partners, for the Plaintiffs.
Mr. Haresh Jagtiani, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Siddhesh Bhole,
for Defendants Nos. 1 to 6, 8 and 9.

¶9

Mr. Pravin Samdani, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Aftab
Diamondwala, i/b M/s. Diamondwala & Co., for Defendant
No. 10.

¶10

CORAM:G.S. PATEL, J
DATED:14th August 2015

¶11

PC:-

¶12

1.The Suit is settled. Consent terms are tendered. These are
signed by the Plaintiff No. 3 for himself and on behalf of Plaintiffs
Nos. 1 to 6; by Defendant No. 4 for himself and on behalf of
Defendants Nos. 1 to 3, 5 and 6; and by a director of Defendant No.
8. The consent terms are also signed by the Advocates for the
signatories. Plaintiff No. 3, Defendant No. 4 and the Director of

¶13

1 of 3

¶14

904-SL194-15.DOC

¶15

Defendant No. 8 are personally present in Court. The consent
terms are taken on record and marked “X” for identification.

¶16

2.The consent terms have several annexures to them.
Annexure “A” is a list of flats to be allotted in the redeveloped
building to the Plaintiffs group. Similarly, Annexure “B” is a list of
flats to be allotted to the rival group, viz., the Ravi Arya Group.

¶17

3.Mr. Samdani, learned Senior Advocate on behalf of
Defendant No. 10, the developer, states that this division of flats in
Annexures “A” and “B” is between the two Arya groups inter se.
For their part, Mr. Dwarkadas, learned Senior Advocate for the
Plaintiffs, and Mr. Jagtiani, learned Senior Advocate for Ravi Arya
Group, agree that the division in Annexures “A” and “B” is final
vis-à-vis Defendant No. 10. They also agree that allotments made
and possession given in terms of Annexure “A” and Annexure “B”
would constitute a full, sufficient and complete discharge of the
10th Defendant’s obligations under the Development Agreement,
as also the individual flat agreements already executed in favour of
the parties. In view of these statements made by Mr. Dwarkadas
and Mr. Jagtiani, which are on instructions, Mr. Samdani states, on
instructions, that his clients, Defendant No.10, will issue the letter
a proforma of which is at Exhibit “E” to the consent terms.

¶18

4.Mr. Dwarkadas, learned Senior Advocate for the Plaintiffs
states on instructions that the Suit is thereupon withdrawn against
Defendants Nos. 9 and 10.

¶19

2 of 3

¶20

904-SL194-15.DOC

¶21

5.All the undertakings in the consent terms are accepted as
undertakings to the Court.

¶22

6. The suit is disposed of in accordance with the consent terms and in accordance with the foregoing portions of this order. The suit also stands disposed of in these terms against Defendant No.7. Decree to be drawn up accordingly.

¶23

7. In view of disposal of the Suit, nothing further survives in the Notice of Motion and the same is disposed of.

¶24

8. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶25

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶26

3 of 3

Pawankumar Arya and 5 Ors. v. Ravikumar Arya and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawankumar Arya and 5 Ors. v. Ravikumar Arya and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hemant Jayant Shah Vs Hdfc Bank Limited and 3 Ors.

Madhusudanlal Narayanlal Pittie Vs Maheshchanraj Agarwal and 4 Ors. and Shabaz Khan(Applicant)

Olga Rodrigues and 2 Ors. Vs Christopher Pinto and 15 Ors.

Jigna Mahesh Thaker Vs Heena Builders and Developers and 3 Ors.

Rajendra Babaji Khade Vs Mr. Lata Vithal Navande and Anr.

Vandana Ravindra Pujari Vs Praveen Ramesh Kunder and 2 Ors.