1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3603 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.1238 OF 1989 Shailaja Gangaram Savant and Ors. .. Plaintiffs Versus Nirmala Dinanath Tembulkar & Ors. .. Defendants Ms.R.C.Nichani i/b. Mahesh Jani & Co. for plaintiffs Mr.Rahul Chitnis with Paresh Shah and Richa Bharadwaja i/b. Shah & Sanghvi for defendant No.12 Mr.S.P.Dalal i/b.Dalal & Co. for defendant Nos. 1 to 4 CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : December 18, 2009. P.C.: 1] Ms.Nichani states that although the notice of motion is shown on board today, parties appearing have no objection if the suit is placed on board under the same caption of filing consent terms and taken up for hearing. It is accordingly taken up. 2] She states that save and except defendant Nos. 1 to 4 and 12 rest of the defendants viz., defendant Nos. 5 to 11 and 13 and 14 have not been appearing. She states that she has been instructed to state that the 2 plaintiffs give up their claims against these defendants and would have no objection if the suit is dismissed as against them. The suit is accordingly dismissed as against these defefendants. 3] Consent terms as between the plaintiffs and defendant Nos. 1 to 4 and 12 and record that the defendant Nos. 1 to 4 have sold, transferred and conveyed unto the defendant No.12 the land more particularly described in clause 1 of the terms and that consent decree is confirmed by defendant Nos. 1 to 4 and 12. 4] In the rest of the clauses, the defendant Nos. 1 to 4 and 12 confirm that the defendant No.12 has been in sole and exclusive possession of the property. The other terms record the agreements and it is then stated that plaintiff Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 7 have handed over original documents as are available to defendant No.12 of which the defendant No.12 has confirmed receipt. Plaintiff Nos. 6 and 7 have not assigned and/or agreed to assign their rights under an agreement which is referred to in clause 5.3 but they state that they indemnify defendant No.12 and that is how plaintiff Nos. 6 and 7 have confirmed that they have no right, title and interest under the agreement, previously entered into inter se. 3 5] It is stated that the title to the property of defendant No.12 stands confirmed as per these consent terms and parties have no objection to the terms being tendered, taken on record and an order made in furtherance thereof. It is stated that the terms are duly explained with their implications and consequences to all parties. Their constituted attorneys/ authorised signatories are present in court and have put their signatures on the terms. The terms have been tendered in Court after negotiations and discussions. Each of the parties have agreed to their being reduced into writing. Undertakings in clauses 5.4, 6.4 and 7.4 are accepted as undertaking to the court. 6] In these circumstances, the terms are taken on record and marked “X” for identification. There will be an order in terms of consent terms. The suit stands decreed accordingly. Notice of Motion No.3603 of 2008 and all other interlocutory applications do not survive in the light of disposal of the suit and dismissed as such. All interim/ ad-interim orders to stand vacated forthwith. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)