Allowed

Paresh Manilal Banker (Huf) v. Mody and Co. and 4 Ors.

Bombay HC9 Feb 2016NMS/276/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On consent terms, the court allowed a settlement between the plaintiff and defendants. The suit and associated motions were decreed in terms of the consent minutes without requiring the impleadment of legal heirs of a deceased defendant.

What did the court decide?

Suit decreed in terms of Consent Terms and Minutes of Order attached; attached Notice of Motions disposed of.

Paresh Manilal Banker (Huf) Vs Mody and Co… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

904-S-265-15.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

SUIT NO. 265 OF 2015

¶4

WITH

¶5

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 506 OF 2015 WITH

¶6

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1200 OF 2015 WITH

¶7

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 276 OF 2016

¶8

¶9

SUIT NO. 265 OF 2015

¶10

…Plaintiff

¶11

Paresh Manilal Banker (HUF) …Plaintiff Versus Mody & Co. & Ors. …Defendants

¶12

Mr. Ramesh Gajria, i/b Gajria & Co., for the Plaintiff.

¶13

Mr. Nishant Sasidharan, i/b M/s. Pravin Mehta & Mithi & Co., for Defendants No. 1, 2, 3 and 5.

¶14

CORAM : S.C. GUPTE, J. DATE : 9th February 2016

¶15

P.C. :

¶16

Learned Counsel for the parties tender Consent Terms

¶17

duly signed by the parties and also their respective Advocates.

¶18

Learned Counsel also tender Minutes of Orders duly signed by the

¶19

Sharayu . 1 / 3

¶20

904-S-265-15.doc

¶21

Advocates for the parties. By these Consent Terms and Minutes, the Plaintiff and Defendants No. 1 to 3 and 5 have settled their disputes amicably and seek a decree in terms of the Minutes of Order and the Consent Terms. Though this Court had originally required the Plaintiff to bring on record the legal heirs of deceased Defendant No. 4, considering the fact that Defendant No. 4 was only a Karta of Kirit Harilal Soni HUF and that the son of the deceased, Rajan Chokshi, is now a Karta of this HUF and the decree is only as between the Plaintiff and Defendants No. 1 to 3 and 5, the parties are permitted to seek a decree without bringing legal heirs of deceased Defendant No. 4 on record.

¶22

2. Consent Terms are taken on record and marked ' X ' for identification. The statements and undertakings contained therein are accepted.

¶23

3. The Suit is decreed in terms of Minutes of Order, which

¶24

is now marked as ' X1 ' for identification.

¶25

There will be no order as to costs.

¶26

Refund of Court fees in accordance with the applicable

rules.

2 / 3

Sharayu .

904-S-265-15.doc

In view of disposal of the Suit, Notice of Motion Nos. 506

¶32

of 2015, Notice of Motion No. 1200 of 2015 and Notice of Motion No. 276 of 2016 do not survive and the same are also disposed of.

¶33

[S.C. GUPTE, J.]

¶34

3 / 3

¶35

Sharayu .

Paresh Manilal Banker (Huf) v. Mody and Co. and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Paresh Manilal Banker (Huf) v. Mody and Co. and 4 Ors.

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

Sandeep Organics Pvt. Ltd. Vs O. C. Specialities Pvt. Ltd.

M/S Enriched Reality Developers Pvt.Ltd. and Anr. Vs M/S Next Level Hospitality Pvt.Ltd. and Anr.

The Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. Vs Icici Bank Ltd.

Leighton India Contractors Pvt.Ltd. Vs Dan-Bunkering (Middle East) Dmcc

Novartis Ag and Anr. Vs M/S S P Pharmaceuticals

Novartis Ag and Anr. Vs M/S S P Pharmaceuticals