:1: :1: :1: HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 49 OF 2003. Mahadeo Gurav. ..Appellant. Versus. Sadanand Gurav. ..Respondent. --- Smt. Latika Belindage for the appellant. Ms. Sarita D’lima i/b M/s. Raval Shah & Co., for the respondents. CORAM: S.B.MHASE & CORAM: S.B.MHASE & CORAM: S.B.MHASE & S.R.SATHE JJ S.R.SATHE JJ S.R.SATHE JJ DATE: AUGUST 23, 2006. DATE: AUGUST 23, 2006. DATE: AUGUST 23, 2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. . Both side Advocates, appellant and respondent are present in Court. They have submitted consent terms which are duly signed by the appellant, respondent and their respective advocates. We have ascertained from the parties that they have understood the consent terms. We find that the consent terms have been arrived at voluntarily and after due understanding. We, therefore, accept consent terms and also the undertakings given in the consent terms. We also find that the consent terms are proper and in the interest of the child so as to offer such child association of the father. The decree passed by the trial Court is, therefore, set :2: :2: :2: aside and it is substituted by the consent terms. Office is directed to draw a decree in terms of the consent terms which are marked "X" for identification. Family Court Appeal is accordingly disposed of. (S.R.SATHE,J.) (S.R.SATHE,J.) (S.R.SATHE,J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) :srp/2006/