-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. WRIT PETITION NO.10048 OF 2004 Shri Rajendra Harikrishna Jain, .. Petitioner Vs 1. Shri Liladhar Krishna Jadhav and ors. .. Respondents Mr S.G.karandikar, for the petitioner. Mr A.G.Kunderkar for respondent nos 1 to 7. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. DATE : 15th December, 2004. DATE : 15th December, 2004. DATE : 15th December, 2004. PC: PC: PC: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the parties state that the parties have amicably settled the dispute. The consent terms duly signed by the parties, were, accordingly, attempted to be filed before the MRT. However, in view of the stay granted by the Apex court in the SLP, wherein an issue of abolition of the MRT is involved, the learned Member of the MRT declined to pass an order in terms of the consent terms. Hence, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition for obtaining -2- orders in terms of the consent terms. The consent terms duly signed by the parties and their respective advocates is placed on record. The petitioner and respondent nos 1,2, 3(c) and 4 are present in the Court. The consent terms is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. The undertakings given by the parties, if any, are accepted. The writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the Consent Terms. . Certified copy expedited. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.)