Terrapolis Commercial Private Limited vs Gayatrikrupa Premises Co. Operative Society Ltd. and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Terrapolis Commercial Private Limited vs Gayatrikrupa Premises Co. Operative Society Ltd. and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Suit permitted to stand withdrawn in terms of the consent terms; leave to amend granted to implead M/s Omtech Enterprises as defendant no.2; Interim Application (L) No.6650 of 2023 disposed of as not surviving; refund of court fees as per Rule.

Issue for consideration

Whether leave to amend should be granted to implead M/s Omtech Enterprises as defendant no.2 to Suit No. 96 of 2024. +1 more

Court's answer

Leave to amend is granted as per the draft amendment impleading M/s Omtech Enterprises as defendant no.2; the amendment is to be carried out within one week and reverification is dispensed with.

Ratio / Principle

The undertaking of learned counsel for proposed defendant no.2 to file vakalatnama within one week is accepted.

Key takeaways

The consent terms are taken on record and marked “X-1”; accepting the assurance of learned counsel that they do not travel beyond the scope of the suit or affect non-parties, and the undertakings given therein, the suit stands withdrawn in terms of the consent terms.ratio¶28
In view of the disposal of the suit, Interim Application (L) No.6650 of 2023 does not survive and is disposed of.ratio¶29
Refund of court fees shall be as per Rule (administrative direction consequential to the disposal).obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Suit No. 96 of 2024 — Terrapolis Commercial Private Limited v. Gayatrikrupa Premises Co-op Society Ltd., with Interim Application (L) No.6650 of 2023; decided 18 March 2025 by Arif S. Doctor, J. Draft amendment impleading M/s Omtech Enterprises as defendant no.2 was taken on record (marked “X”) and leave to amend granted, the amendment to be carried out within one week and reverification dispensed with; counsel for the proposed defendant no.2 undertook to file his vakalatnama within one week. Consent terms amicably resolving the disputes were tendered, their execution being supported by the report dated 7th March 2025 of the court's Associate, which recorded that the signatories admitted the contents and executed the terms out of free will without undue influence or coercion. The consent terms (marked “X-1”) were confirmed by both counsel not to travel beyond the scope of the suit nor to affect non-parties; accepting the assurance and the undertakings therein, the court permitted the suit to stand withdrawn in terms of the consent terms. The interim application, not surviving the disposal of the suit, was disposed of. Refund of court fees as per Rule; soft copy of the consent terms to be uploaded as the second order and the signed hard copy permanently retained on file.

Digitally signed by MEERA MEERA MAHESH MAHESH JADHAV JADHAV Date: 2025.03.19 18:35:59 +0530

501-s-96-24.doc

1 / 2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

SUIT NO. 96 OF 2024

Terrapolis Commercial Private Limited

...Plaintiff

Versus

Gayatrikrupa Premises Co-op Society Ltd. ...Defendant

WITH

INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.6650 OF 2023

Ms Sharanya Mahimtura i/b Lexicon Law Partners for Plaintiff. Mr. Shashank Thatte and Mr. Yuvraj Takale for Defendants.

CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. DATED : 18th MARCH 2025

P.C. :

1 Not on board. Upon mentioning taken on production board.

2 Parties have tendered draft amendment essentially by which, M/s Omtech Enterprises is sought to be impleaded as defendant no.2 to the suit. Draft amendment is taken on record and marked “X” for identification. Leave to amend as per the draft tendered is granted. Amendment to be carried out within one week from today. Reverification is dispensed with.

3 Learned Counsel Mr. Thatte submits that he is appearing on behalf of proposed defendant no.2 and undertakes to file vakalatnama within a period of one week from today. His undertaking is accepted.

4 Parties then tendered consent terms, by which the disputes and differences

in the suit have been amicably resolved. The execution of the consent terms is

Meera Jadhav

501-s-96-24.doc

2 / 2

supported by the report dated 7th March 2025 of the Associate of this court. The report inter alia records as follows:

“All the Signatories have admitted the contents of the consent terms. The consent term are duly signed by the parties out of their free will without any undue influence and coercion. The consent term is duly executed by the signatories.”

5 The consent terms are taken on record and marked “X-1” for identification. Both the learned counsel confirm that the consent terms do not touch upon any issue which travels beyond the scope of the suit neither do they affect or afford to affect right of any parties who is not party to the suit. Accepting the assurance of the learned counsel as also the undertaking given in the consent terms, the suit stands withdrawn in terms of the consent terms.

6 In view of the disposal of the suit, interim application does not survive and is accordingly disposed of.

7 Refund of court fees shall be as per Rule.

8 A soft copy of the Consent Terms will be uploaded as the second order in the matter. The Registry is to ensure that the hard copy of the signed Consent Terms is permanently retained on file as part of the record and is not sent for destruction in the ordinary course.

(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)

Meera Jadhav