1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NOs. 1705/07 & 1468/08 IN SUIT NO. 4385 OF 1996 Anjani Kumar Kaushal & anr........Plaintiffs versus Mahesh Associates & ors........Defendants. Ms. Sunita Tiwari adv. for the Plaintiffs Mr. S.J. Khera adv. for the Defendants 1 and 2. CORAM: A. P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 06th MAY, 2009. P.C.: 1. The plaintiff instituted a suit for specific performance of an agreement. During pendency of the suit the Court Receiver has taken possession of the suit premises under order passed by this court. The parties have resolved the dispute by entering into an amicable settlement. Pursuant to the settlement reached between the parties Minutes of the Order are placed on record duly signed by the plaintiff and the defendant nos.1 and 2 so also by their advocates, which is taken on record and marked as `X’ for identification. It is stipulates in para 9 of the Minutes of the Order that the suit be dismissed against defendant nos. 3 to 9 and 11. Defendant no.10 is the Court Receiver. A joint prayer is 2 made by the learned counsel for the plaintiff and the defendant nos.1 and 2 for disposal of the suit in terms of the Minutes of the Order. In the result the suit stands disposed of in terms of the Minutes of the Order to the extent it relates to the plaintiff and the defendant nos.1 and 2 and the suit stands dismissed for want of prosecution against defendant nos. 3 to 9 and 11. 2. In view of the disposal of the suit, the above Chamber Summons does not survive and the same also stands disposed of. 3. The Plaintiff shall be entitled for refund of the court fees as permissible under the rules. (A.P. DESHPANDE, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION 3 CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 735 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO. 1371 OF 1996 Kishore B. Talreja ........Plaintiff versus Mahesh Associates & ors........Defendants. Mr. Bharat C. Raghani i/b Haridas & Co. adv. for the Plaintiff Mr. S.J. Khera adv. for the Defendants 1 and 2. Mr. R.V. Sipahimalani .. Applicant in support of Chamber summons. CORAM: A. P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 06th MAY, 2009. P.C.: 1. The plaintiff instituted the present suit seeking specific performance of an agreement entered into by the plaintiff with the defendant nos. 1 and 2. During pendency of the suit, the plaintiff has assigned his rights in the suit property which comprises of a flat no.301 on third floor of Mangal Mahesh Co- operative housing Society, S.V. Road, Borivli, Bombay under a deed of assignment dated 15-4-2009. Consequent upon the assignment of the right by the plaintiff in favour of the applicant, the applicant assignee has taken out this chamber summons for substitution of his name in place of the name of the plaintiff. The learned counsel for the plaintiff has no objection for substitution. The learned counsel appearing for the defendant nos. 1 and 2 as 4 well as has no objection for allowing the chamber summons. The chamber summons is taken on record and marked as `X’ for identification. In the result, by consent, this chamber summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) and (b). 2. The parties have also placed on record Consent Minutes of the order signed by the plaintiff, defendant nos. 1 and 2, and the applicant assignee besides their advocates on record. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. (A.P. DESHPANDE, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 1371 OF 1996 Vasudeo Chetanram Narsinghani ........Plaintiff versus Mahesh Associates & ors........Defendants. 5 Mr. Bharat C. Raghani i/b Haridas & Co. adv. for the Plaintiff Mr. S.J. Khera adv. for the Defendants 1 and 2. Mr. R.V. Sipahimalani .. Applicant in support of Chamber summons. CORAM: A. P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 06th MAY, 2009. P.C.: 1. The plaintiff instituted the present suit seeking specific performance of an agreement entered into by the plaintiff with the defendant nos. 1 and 2. During pendency of the suit, the plaintiff has assigned his rights in the suit property which comprises of a flat no.301 on third floor of Mangal Mahesh Co- operative housing Society, S.V. Road, Borivli, Bombay under a deed of assignment dated 15-4-2009. Consequent upon the assignment of the right by the plaintiff in favour of the applicant, the applicant assignee had taken out chamber summons no. 735/09for substitution of his name in place of the name of the plaintiff. By consent of parties the chamber summons has been allowed and substitution permitted. 2. The parties have resolved the dispute by entering into an amicable settlement. Pursuant to the settlement reached between the parties, Minutes of the order are placed on record duly signed by the substituted plaintiff and the defendant nos. 1 and 2 so also by their advocates, which is taken on record and 6 marked as `X’ for identification. A joint prayer is made by the learned counsel for the plaintiff and the defendant nos.1 and 2 for disposal of the suit in terms of the Minutes of the order. In the result suit stands disposed of in terms of the Minutes of the order. The plaintiff shall be entitled to refund of the court fees as permissible under he rules. (A. P. DESHPANDE, J.)