wp2965.11 1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ WRIT PETITION NO.2965 OF 2011 ,With CA/4999/2011 ,In WP/2965/2011 MANGESH LATA JADHAV VERSUS SNAJEEVANI AMRUTKUMAR DESHMUKH (SHIRADKAR) AND ORS ... Advocate for petitioner: Mr.Anup R. Nikam. Advocate for Respondents : Mr. Nagarkar Kiran M. for R/1 and 2 ... CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. Dated: December 09, 2011 ... Heard. 2 It appears from perusal of the order dated 20th June, 2011 passed by this Court that argument was advanced on behalf of the petitioner that the Court has not considered whether the compromise was in the interest of minor. Attention of the Court was invited to the wp2965.11 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and it was argued that no certificate of advocate stating that the compromise is in the interest of minor was filed before the trial Court. 3 This Court, on 17th November, 2011, heard the matter extensively. The Counsel for the respondents asserted that affidavit of the natural guardian i.e. mother of the petitioner was filed before the compromise was entered into. The advocate's certificate was also there. However, this position was disputed by the Counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, this Court called for Record and proceedings from the trial Court. 4 The learned Counsel for the respondents invited my attention to the certificate issued by wp2965.11 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ one Advocate Anand Narhari Giram stating therein that the compromise is for the benefit and welfare of the minor defendant No.2 Mangesh s/o Lata Jadhav. 5 In the aforesaid background, the compromise which was recorded before the Lok Adaalat appears to be with the consent of the natural guardian and also after having certificate of the advocate on record. Therefore, in my opinion, there is no substance in the writ petition and the same stands rejected. Civil Application, if any, stands disposed of. Record & proceedings be sent back forthwith to the concerned Court. (S.S. SHINDE, J.) PLK/*