mgn 1 app-lodg.530-2011.sxw THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL LODGING NO.530 OF 2011 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4506 OF 2006 AND NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2170 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.3365 OF 2006 Vadapalli Sashikala Subbarao ..Appellant Ori.Plaintiff Versus Y.Subhashini Subrahmanyam & Ors. ..Respondents Ori.Defendants Mr. P.K. Dhakepalkar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Talegankar, Ms. Nityoah Mehta and Ms. M.M. Patel i/b. M/s.M.M. Patel & Co., for the Appellant. Mr. Kevick Setalwad with Ms. Danaya Dadachandji & Ashutosh Kaushik i/b. M/s.M.K. Ambalal & Co., for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. Rahul Narichania i/b.M/s.Amin & Co., for respondent No.3. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. Tuesday, 23 August, 2011 P.C. This appeal is directed against the order dated 23 June 2011 of the learned trial Judge of this Court in Notice of Motion No.4506 of 2006 and Notice of Motion No.2170 of 2009 in Suit No.3365 of 2006. 2. The learned trial Court passed the impugned order after referring to the fact that the subject matter of the suit was the amount lying in the bank accounts of the parents namely Dr. Y.K.Subrahmanyam and Smt. Y. Rajeshwari and immovable properties situate at Delhi and Bangalore. mgn 2 app-lodg.530-2011.sxw 3. Since the appellant-plaintiff is the sister of the respondents-defendants, this Court had suggested to the parties and their learned Counsel to resolve the dispute amicably. Accordingly, the parties and their learned Counsel held several meetings and today i.e. 23 August 2011 the consent terms dated 23 August 2011 are presented before us. The consent terms are signed by the learned Advocate for the appellant-plaintiff as well as the appellant-plaintiff, learned Advocate for the respondents-defendant Nos.1 and 2 and learned Advocate for respondent-defendant No.3 as well as respondent-defendant No.3. The learned Advocate for respondent-defendant Nos.1 and 2 states that she has signed the consent terms on the basis of the instructions received by her telephonically and that her client will send the e-mail confirmation within one week. 4. Learned Counsel for the appellant-plaintiff further states that in view of the consent terms and particularly in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties in respect of the flat at Bangalore the appellant-plaintiff does not have any claim in respect of the moveable properties including the bank accounts of the parents of the parties herein namely Dr. Y.K.Subrahmanyam and Smt. Y. Rajeshwari which were mentioned in the Schedule in Suit No. 3365 of 2006. 5. In view of the above consent terms, which are admitted by the appellant- plaintiff and respondent-defendant No.3 and in view of the statement being made by the learned Advocate for the respondents-defendant Nos.1 and 2 that she had authority to sign the consent terms on behalf of her clients i.e. respondents-defendant Nos. 1 and 2, we dispose of this appeal in terms of the following order:- (i) The consent terms are taken on record and marked “X” for identification. mgn 3 app-lodg.530-2011.sxw (ii) There shall be a decree in terms of the consent terms which are accepted. (iii) The undertakings given by all the parties are accepted. (iv) The learned Advocate for the respondents-defendant Nos. 1 and 2 shall bring her clients’ consent through e-mail or otherwise and file the same in this Court within one week from today. (v) There shall be refund of Court Fees as per Rules. (vi) Issuance of certified copy of this order and decree shall be expedited. CHIEF JUSTICE DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.