IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUM.SUIT NO. 3904 OF 1999 Vijaya Bank : Plaintiffs v/s M/s. Vaz Forwarding Ltd. : Defendants Advocate for plaintiff absent Ms. M. Monterio advocate for defendants Coram : Shri A.P. Deshpande, J Date : 13.6.2008 P.C. This suit was listed on 6.6.2008. Counsel for the plaintiff was absent. The counsel for the defendant was present. By way of abundant caution the counsel for the defendant has issued notice to the advocate for the plaintiff on 12.6.2008 bringing to their notice the settlement reached between the plaintiff and the defendant and regarding fact of absence of the counsel for the plaintiff to 6.6.2008. Despite the notice counsel for the plaintiff is absent today. The counsel for the defendant has placed on record the communication received by the defendant from the General Manager of the plaintiff bank which goes to certify that all the amount payable by the defendant has been received by the bank and there are no dues payable by the defendant. The communication is dt. 3.6.2004. There is another communication placed on record by the learned counsel for the defendant and same is dt. 31.5.2004 addressed by the General Manger of the plaintiff bank to its advocate and solicitors intimating the advocate to withdraw the present suit filed against the defendant. In the said communication it is stated that the bank has compromised the account and has received sum of Rs. 290810.80 as full and final settlement on 30.8.2003. By the said letter the General Manger has requested advocate for the plaintiff to withdraw the suit by moving an appropriate application before High court. In the submission of the : 2 : learned counsel for the defendant, despite instructions from the plaintiff bank to withdraw the suit, the advocate for the plaintiff is not appearing as and when the matter is listed and has not moved for the withdrawal of the suit. The communication placed on record by the learned counsel for the defendant are taken on record and marked for identification as X, X1 and X2. In view of the communication dt. 31.5.2004 the suit is dismissed as withdrawn. The plaintiff shall be entitled to refund all the court fee stamp as permissible under the rules. (A.P. Deshpande, J)