1 mss S1694 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 1694 2007 MR. MIR MOZAM ALI .. PLAINTIFF Vs. MR. YUSUF MUNIR SHAIKH & ORS... DEFENDANTS Ms. Geeta Shastri i/b A. A. Siddiequie for the plaintiff Mr. B. R. Vishwakarma i/b N. P. Hemrajani for D-1 Mr. M.A. Rathod i/b A. R. Pande for D-2 to 4. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED: 5/12/2011 P.C. The consent terms between the plaintiff and the defendants in a suit for possession on title proceeds on the basis that the plaintiff is the owner of the property on the strength of an agreement for sale in his favour executed by defendant No. 1 and subsequent sale deed which has been executed on 20th of June, 2011. The conveyance deed is registered. Prior thereto on the basis of the agreement for sale, the immovable property has been transferred in the plaintiff’s name in the share certificate of the concerned co-operative 2 mss S1694 housing society. The Defendant Nos. 2,3 and 4 are occupants of the flat and by this they have agreed to accept a sum of Rs.15 lacs in full and final settlement of all their claims. That sum has been received by defendant Nos. 2 to 4 from the plaintiff. The receipt thereof is confirmed by the parties and their advocates. 2. It is in these circumstances that defendant Nos. 2 to 4 have willingly and without any pressure or force agreed to handover vacant and peaceful possession of flat No. 106, 1st floor, B-Wing of Building No. 23 of Nalanda Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., situated at Kapadia Nagar, CST Road, Kurla (West), Mumbai 400 070 admeasuring 785 sq. ft. They state that they are handing over the physical possession to the plaintiff on the execution of these terms. 3. Such terms in a suit for possession on title are reduced into writing and it is requested that they may be taken on record and the suit be disposed of accordingly. 4. The terms are signed by the plaintiff Mr. Mir Mozam Ali and his advocate. They are signed by the defendant No. 2 and his wife, so also his son. The terms have been explained in Hindi to defendant Nos. 2 to 4, so also interpreted by their advocate Shri Ashok Pande. The defendant Nos. 2 to 4 are present in court and they identify and confirm their signatures below 3 mss S1694 these consent terms. 5. In the light of the above, I am satisfied that the consent terms dated 22nd November, 2011 can be taken on record and is taken on record and marked “X” for identification. They put an end to the private dispute regarding title to an immovable property in Mumbai. 6. There will be an order in terms of the consent terms. The suit is decreed accordingly. The decree is passed also on the basis of the stand taken by the 1st defendant in the written statement and that he has executed the necessary documents of title in favour of the plaintiff. Their execution as also the contents thereof are admitted. 7. This order is passed in the presence of defendant Nos. 2 and 3 and after perusing the original documents of title in favour of the plaintiff. (S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)