1 S.1003.04.sxw JPP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO.1003 OF 2004 WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 348 OF 2O11 Mrs. Kiran Khosla & Anr. ... Plaintiffs. V/s. Mr. Rameshkumar Tulsiram Sachdev & Ors. ... Defendants. And Radhika Satsangi. ... Applicant. Mr. Chirag Balsara, Ibrahim Merchant i/b. K.V. Aiyar & Associates for the Plaintiffs. Mr. S.K. Srivastav and Ms. Gayatri Sharma for Defendant 3. Mr. T.N. Tripathi for Defendant Nos. 4 to 8. Mr. Shyam Mehta i/b. R.M. Vanoo for the Applicant in CHS. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 21st MARCH 2011. P.C. :- Learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the Plaintiffs want to withdraw the Suit simplicitor. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant in Chamber Summons No.348 of 2011 tried to submit that the Suit cannot be withdrawn unless some steps as mentioned in the consent terms in Suit filed in the City Civil Court are not complied with. This Court is not required to go into these aspects. If a party is not inclined to prosecute the Suit, the Court cannot compel the party to go ahead with the Suit. If Applicant in the 2 S.1003.04.sxw Chamber Summons No.348 of 2011 is desirous of instituting appropriate proceedings to protect his interest, the said applicant may do so. No specific liberty from this Court is required. 2. Hence, following order is passed :- (i) The Suit is allowed to be withdrawn with no order as to costs. Refund of Court fees granted as per Rules. (ii) If any interim order is running against the Defendants the same stands withdrawn. (iii) Chamber Summons No.348 of 2011 does not survive in view of withdrawal of the suit. Chamber Summons is disposed of with no order as to costs. (iv) The Plaintiffs intended to file certain affidavits in support of their claim for withdrawal. The affidavits (9 in numbers) are taken on record. (R.Y. GANOO, J.)