* 1 * Appeal.147.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 147 OF 2010 IN SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 361 OF 2007 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 929 OF 2007 Prabhudas Liladhar Pvt. Ltd .....Appellant (Orig.Defd no.1) V/S. Smita Conductors Ltd and anr .........Respondents (Orig.Plff & Deft.no.2 respectively) * * * * Ms. Deepti B. Mistry i/by. Vaibhav Mehta & Associates, Advocate for the appellant. Ms. Saumya Srikrishna i/by. M/s. Kanga & Co., Advocate for respondent no.1. Coram: MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. Dated : 5 OCTOBER, 2010. P.C. : 1. The learned Advocate for the appellant (original defendant no.1) and Advocate for respondent no.1 (original plaintiff) * 2 * Appeal.147.2010 tender consent terms with corrections in paragraphs-5(b) and 7. The consent terms are signed by the appellant (original defendant no.1) and respondent no.1 (original plaintiff) and their respective advocates. Appellant and respondent no.1 who are present before the Court admit their signatures on the consent terms. The consent terms so tendered are taken on record and marked Annexure-X for identification. 2. As far as respondent no.2 is concerned who is not a party to the consent terms, the learned advocate for respondent no. 1(original plaintiff) states that the plaintiff withdraws the suit against respondent no.2 (defendant no.2). 3. The learned advocates for the appellant and respondent no. 1 request that the appeal be disposed of in terms of the consent terms. 4. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the consent terms. Since the appeal is settled and disposed of in terms of the consent terms, the court-fee on the appeal memo shall be refunded in accordance with law. [CHIEF JUSTICE] [SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J]