ASN 1 NMS-1604.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1604 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO. 4120 OF 1994 Jagdish Trikamji Gajjar. ..Plaintiff. Vs. Maheshchandra T.Gajjar and ors. ..Defendants. And Shri.Yogesh Dhirajlal Thacker and ors. ..Respondents. Mr. Amit Jamsandekar and Mr.A.Ahuja for Plaintiff i/by Ahuja & ? Associates. Mr. Pritesh Rajgor i/by DSK Legal for Defendant No.1. Mr. D.H.Mehta i/by Suman Jain for Respondents. CORAM : R.M. SAVANT , J. DATE : 18th April, 2011 PC : The learned counsel appearing for the parties i. e. Counsel appearing for the plaintiff, defendant No.1 and the respondents tender consent terms evidencing the settlement between the parties in so far as the property covered by the instant notice of motion being Survey No. 187 Village Sadau District Mundra, Kutch. The said consent terms have been signed by the plaintiff, defendant No.1 and respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Respondent No.5 has signed as Constituted Attorney for Respondent Nos. 2 to 4. The said consent terms are taken on record and marked “X” ASN 2 NMS-1604.sxw for identification. The plaintiff Shri. Jagdish Trikamji Gajjar, defendant No.1 Maheshchandra Trikamji Gajjar are personally present in court. They were put in the witness box and asked whether the consent terms are acceptable to them. They have replied in the affirmative. Respondent Nos. 1 and 5 are also present in court and they also accept the said consent terms. The original Power of Attorney in favour of the plaintiff by the defendants and respondent Nos. 2 to 4 is also annexed to the consent terms.. Motion is disposed of in terms of the consent terms and restricted to the property mentioned herein above. The suit in respect of the other properties would proceed. All interim orders passed in the above mentioned motion stand vacated. The undertakings mentioned in the consent terms are accepted. Parties to the consent terms have accepted to act in accordance with the consent terms and within time stipulated in the consent terms. It is agreed by the parties that in view of the consent terms, the plaintiff would have no claim against defendant No.1 in respect of the property covered by the instant motion in future. R.M. SAVANT, J.