IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No 1310 of 2000 For Approval and Signature: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.H.KADRI ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- JAYANTILAL DEVRAJBHAI RAIYANI Versus MAHESHCHANDRA JATASHANKAR SHASTRI -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Civil Revision Application No. 1310 of 2000 MR ZUBIN F BHARDA for Petitioner No. 1-5 Mr. V.G. Dave, for MR YOGESH S LAKHANI for Respondent No. 1-3 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent No. 1-3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.H.KADRI Date of decision: 03/12/2003 ORAL JUDGEMENT 1. This Civil Revision Application has been filed by the petitioners (original plaintiffs) against the order dated December 1, 2000, passed by the learned 3rd Extra Assistant Judge, Rajkot, in Civil Misc. Appeal No.82 of 2000, whereby, the order dated September 20, 2000 passed by the learned 5th Joint Civil Judge (S.D.), Rajkot, dismissing the injunction application Exh.5 filed by the plaintiffs in Regular Civil Suit No.874 of 2000, is confirmed. Rule was issued in the Civil Revision Application on March 13, 2002 by the Court (Coram: D.K. Trivedi, J.). 2. Today, when the matter is called out, the learned advocates appearing for the parties have placed on record letter dated October 12, 2003, written by the respondent No.3, Abdulkadar Taherali Shadikot, indicating that the dispute involved in the original suit has been amicably settled between the parties. Along with the letter, compromise agreement arrived at between the parties duly attested by a Notary is also annexed. As the dispute involved in the present Civil Revision Application is amicably settled between the parties out of court, learned advocate, Mr. V.G. Dave, who appears for learned advocate, Mr. Y.S. Lakhani, for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the present Civil Revision Application. Learned advocate, Mr. Kirit R. Patel, who appears for Mr. Zubin Bharda, for the respondents, has no objection against the withdrawal. Xerox copies of the letter dated October 12, 203 and the compromise agreement are ordered to be taken on record. 3. Hence, this Civil Revision Application is disposed of as withdrawn. The ad-interim relief stands vacated. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. (M.H. Kadri, J.) (swamy)