*1* S-1384-08.sxw Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO.1384 OF 2008 Manorama Sureshchandra Jain & Ors. ... Plaintiffs V/s. Sushil Kumar Tayal & Ors. ... Defendants Mr. Chandrakant N. Chavan for the Plaintiffs. Mr. Mukesh Jain for Defendant Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 19 th December, 2011. P.C. : 1. The consent terms between the Plaintiffs and Defendant Nos.1 and 2 in a Suit for specific performance of an oral agreement state that the Plaintiffs are not interested in seeking specific performance and they have settled the claim on receipt of the sum of Rs.6,50,000/-. This amount is accepted in full and final settlement of all claims in the Suit. The Plaintiffs have willingly given up their prayer seeking specific performance of an Agreement for Sale of an immovable property. 2. The presence of the parties is marked and each of them have identified their signatures, which are placed below these consent terms. The consent terms have been explained and interpreted to them in Hindi. The signature of the Plaintiff No.1 is in Hindi and she has identified it and she has confirmed it. Each one of them are aware of the consequences which would follow after the consent terms are taken on record and the Suit will be disposed off in accordance therewith. *2* S-1384-08.sxw 3. On perusal of these consent terms, I am satisfied that the Plaintiffs have willingly given up their claim for specific performance of an oral agreement. The consent terms are not contrary to law or public policy either. They are, therefore, taken on record and marked “X” for identification. 4. The Suit stands dismissed as against Defendant Nos.3 and 4, who are formal parties. 5. There will be order in terms of the consent terms. 6. Refund of Court fees as per rules. 7. There will be no order as to costs. 8. All interlocutory proceedings and orders therein stand disposed off and vacated. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.)