1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Amk APPEAL NO. 431 OF 2005 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1962 OF 2004 IN SUIT NO. 1003 OF 2004 Mrs. Kiran M. Khosla & 2 Ors. .. Appellants Vs. Rameshkumar Tulsiram Sachdev & Ors... Respondents Mr. S. U. Kamdar Sr. Counsel i/b Hariani & Co. for the Appellants. Mr. Gaurav Joshi i/b FZB & Associates for Resp. Nos.1 & 2 . Ms. Gayatri Sharma i/b S. K. Srivastav & Co. for Resp. No.3 Ms. Sapna Rachure i/b T. N. Tripathi & Co. for Resp. Nos. 4 to 8. CORAM : F. I. REBELLO, J. A. A. SAYED, J. DATE : 9th April, 2010. P.C. 1. On behalf of the appellants learned Counsel submits that they filed Consent Terms for respondent Nos.4 to 8 and so far as respondent Nos.1 to 3 are concerned they are not pressing the appeal. 2. On behalf of respondent No.1 learned Counsel opposes the filing of the Consent Terms. It is submitted that the appellants have entered into Consent Terms with them 2 whereby they are entitled to the sum of Rs.50 lacs which appellants have not paid. Thus Consent Terms will affect their rights. On behalf of the appellants learned Counsel submits that they stand by the Consent Terms under which they have to pay a sum of Rs.50 lacs in favour of respondent No.1. They have submitted that they cannot withdraw the suit as the present Consent Terms is only an interim arrangement between the appellants and respondent Nos.4 to 8 and they have not arrived at the final settlement with respondent Nos.4 to 8. 3. The Consent Terms of the appellants with the respondent Nos.4 to 8 are an interim arrangement and considering that this Court pass the following order :- (i) The Consent Terms between the appellants and respondent Nos.4 to 8 are taken on record and marked ‘X’. Appeal against respondent Nos.1 to 3 is dismissed as not pressed. (ii) Order in terms of the Consent Terms subject to aforesaid observations. The Appeal is disposed of accordingly. (A. A. SAYED, J.) (F. I. REBELLO, J.