The court disposed of two suits based on consent terms filed by the parties, recording the settlement and dismissing the suits as withdrawn.
Suits dismissed as withdrawn; interim applications disposed as infructuous; refund of court fee if any. order uploaded.
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.
905-S3797-91+.DOC
Atul
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO. 3797 OF 1991
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1758 OF 1992 AND
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2152 OF 1992
…Plaintiff
Prakash Jethalal Thakkar…Plaintiff
Versus
Sulochana Lalbhai Shah & Ors…Defendants
AND
SUIT NO. 431 OF 2001
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 417 OF 2007
AND
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2106 OF 2007
AND
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2539 OF 2008 AND
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3935 OF 2008
Sulochana Lalbhai Shah & Ors...Plaintiffs
Versus
Prakash Jethalal Thakkar & Ors...Defendants
...Defendants
Page 1 of 4
23rd February 2018
905-S3797-91+.DOC
Mr Aditya Shiralkar, i/b Ranjit & Co., for the Plaintiff in
S/3797/1991 & for Defendants Nos. 1 & 2 in S/431/2001.
Mr Jay Joshi, i/b M/s. IR Joshi & Co., for Defendant No. 1(a) in
S/3797/1991 & Plaintiffs Nos. 1(a) to 1(d) in S/421/2001.
Mr Prakash Thakkar, Plaintiff No. 1 is present.
Mr Mehul Shah, Plaintiff No. 1(b) in S/431/01, is present.
Ms Dipti Thakkar, Plaintiff No. 2, is present.
Mrs Sulochana Shah, Defendant No. 1(a) and Plaintiff No. 1(a) in
S/431/01, is present.
Mr Amit Sheth, for Defendants Nos. 8 & 9.
Mr Ramesh Seth, for M/s. SP Builders, Defendant No. 8 is present.
Mr Mohan Thakur, Defendant No. 9, present in person.
Mr RP Carvalho, with Murtuza Federal & ML Sayed, i/b M/s.
Federal & Rashmikant, for Defendant No. 10.
Mr Gaurav Gandhi, Director of Essegee Real Estate Developers Pvt
Ltd, is present.
CORAM:G.S. PATEL, J
DATED:23rd February 2018
PC:-
SUIT NO. 3797 OF 1991
The parties are personally present in Court.The disputes are settled. Consent Terms are tendered. These are signed by the Plaintiff, Defendant No. 1(a), 8, 9 and 10. The Suit is dismissed as withdrawn as against Defendants Nos. 5 and 6. Defendant No. 7 has been deleted by previous order. Similarly Defendants Nos. 2, 3 and 4 have been previously deleted.Page 2 of 4
23rd February 2018
905-S3797-91+.DOC
I have seen the Consent Terms. The Consent Terms are in order and not contrary to law. They have been drawn by the parties of their own volition without any coercion. The Consent Terms are taken on record and marked “X” for identification with today’s date. The undertakings in the Consent Terms are accepted as undertakings to the Court.The Suit is disposed of in accordance with the Consent Terms. Refund of Court Fee, if any, in accordance with law.In view of this, all interim applications do not survive and are disposed of as infructuous.A scanned copy of the Consent Terms without its annexures will be uploaded as Order No. 2 in this matter. If the scanned copy is not provided, this order will not be uploaded and the Suit will be dismissed.SUIT NO. 431 OF 2001
In view of the Consent Terms filed in Suit No. 3797 of 1991, the Plaintiffs, Sulochana Lalbhai Shah and others seek leave to withdraw the Suit.The Suit is dismissed as withdrawn. Refund of court fee, if any, in accordance with law.Page 3 of 4
23rd February 2018
905-S3797-91+.DOC
In view of this, all interim applications do not survive and are disposed of as infructuous.(G. S. PATEL, J)
Page 4 of 4
23rd February 2018
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Prakash Jethalal Thakkar
Sulochana Lalbhai Shah
G. S. PATEL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court