In an arbitration petition, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay settled the matter between parties based on tendered consent terms, recorded their presence, and disposed of the petition as per the terms.
Petition disposed of in terms of consent terms accepted by the court.
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.
1/1
ARPL-11281-15.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.11281 OF 2015
Gyanchand Suvalal Jain & Anr. ...Petitioners v/s. Madhav Tulsiram Changle & Anr. ...Respondents
...Respondents
Mr.Dharmesh S. Jain for the Petitioners. Mr.Rakesh Agarwal for the Respondents.
CORAM : A.A. SAYED, J. DATED : 6 MAY 2015
P.C.:
(Mentioned out of turn.)
Learned Counsel for the parties state that the matter has been
settled between the parties. They have tendered Consent Terms, which are taken on record and marked “X” for identification.
kambli
1/1
Gyanchand Suvalal Jain & Anr.
Madhav Tulsiram Changle & Anr.
A.A. SAYED
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
