Dismissed¶20

Rajan Raghunathrao Dessai and 3 Ors. v. Joseph Graciano Felizardo Barreto and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC15 Jan 2026WP/120/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Goa; High Court of Bombay at Goa; WP 120 of 2024; Dessai v. Barreto; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; settlement/compromise memo; Rs.10,50,000 (Ten Lakhs Fifty Thousand); payment by cheques; Execution Application No.15/2018; Principal District Judge South Goa Margao; executing court; undertaking to withdraw execution proceedings within two weeks; authenticated copy to Executing Court; Valmiki Menezes J.; order dated 15 January 2026.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn; authenticated copy of the Order to be placed before the Executing Court; Respondent No.1 to withdraw Execution Proceedings No.15/2018 within two weeks. ¶20

Rajan Raghunathrao Dessai and 3 Ors. vs Joseph Graciano Felizardo Barreto and 3 Ors. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

WP 120 of 2024

¶2

Suzana

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.120 OF 2024

¶5

RAJAN RAGHUNATHRAO DESSAI AND 3 ORS ... PETITIONERS

¶6

Versus

¶7

JOSEPH GRACIANO FELIZARDO BARRETO AND 3 ORS ... RESPONDENTS

¶8

Ms. Maria Carmel Cota Viegas, Advocate for the Petitioners.

¶9

Mr. Laban Carvalho, Advocate for Respondent No.1.

¶10

Mr. Anirudh Salkar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4.

¶11

CORAM:- VALMIKI MENEZES, J.

¶12

DATED :- 15th January, 2026

¶13

P.C.

¶14

Learned Advocate Mr. Anirudh Salkar for Respondents No.2 to 4 has placed on record a memo in which it is stated that the parties have settled their dispute in the matter towards an amount of Rs.10,50,000/(Rupees Ten Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) to be paid by Respondents No.2 to 4 to Respondent No.1. The memo further states that the entire payment has been effected to Respondent No.1 vide various cheques which are detailed in paragraph 2 of the memo.

¶15

On instructions, Mr Laban Carvalho, learned Advocate appearing for the Respondent No.1 states that the Respondent No.1 has in fact

Page 1 of 2

15th January, 2026

WP 120 of 2024

realised the entire amount of Rs.10,50,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) under the said cheques and since the matter now stands settled, he has instructions to withdraw the Execution Application No.15/2018 pending before the Court of Principal District Judge, South Goa, Margao.

¶20

On this statement, Ms Maria Viegas, on instructions of the Petitioner, seeks to withdraw the present Petition. In view of the claim in Execution proceedings No.15/2018 now having been settled and on the undertaking given by the Respondent No.1 that the Execution Proceedings No.15/2018 would be withdrawn within two weeks from today, the present Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶21

An authenticated copy of this Order shall be placed before the Executing Court.

¶22

VALMIKI MENEZES, J.

¶23

Signed by: MARIA SUZANA REBELLO Designation: Personal Assistant Date: 15/01/2026 16:54:09

¶24

Page 2 of 2

¶25

15th January, 2026

Rajan Raghunathrao Dessai and 3 Ors. v. Joseph Graciano Felizardo Barreto and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajan Raghunathrao Dessai and 3 Ors. v. Joseph Graciano Felizardo Barreto and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Victor Santan D Cunha(Since Deceased), Thr. Lr'S vs Francis Manuel D Cunha

Akshay Ajay Nawle vs Natividade Jerome Dsouza and 2 Ors.

Hemal Khanderia vs M/S. United Builders, Thr. Their Partner Rashmibhai Kotecha

Shantidevi Ramchandra Halwai (Since Deceased Rep. by Her Lrs) vs M/S. Lotlikar House of Petroleum Rep. by Its Partners and 6 Ors.

Nanu Engineers Private Ltd. Thr Its Director Mr Sankalp Sandesh Naik vs Tajdin Javerbhai Mavany (Since Dec) Rep. through His Legal Representative and Anr.

Kapil Madhukar Betgiri vs Secretary for Urban Development and 13 Ors.