1 jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 560 OF 2009 IN W.P.NO. 360 OF 2009 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 117 OF 2010 IN APPEAL NO. 560 OF 2009 IN W.P.NO. 360 OF 2009 M/s.Devidayal Stainless Steel Ind. Pvt. Ltd.Mumbai ..Appellant Vs. Ratnamma Sreenivasan Panikar, Mumbai and Anr. ..Respondents .... Mr.Kiran S.Bapat i/b M/s. Desai and Desai & Associates for Appellant Mr.S.C.Naidu along with Y.C.Naidu and N.P.Dalvi i/b C.R.Naidu & Co. for Respondents .... CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATE : 25th JANUARY, 2010 P.C.: 1. This intra court writ appeal arises from the order dated 30th March, 2 2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 360 of 2009 on the Original Side. Respondent No.2 is a formal party and therefore, stands deleted forthwith. 2. During the pendency of this appeal, the parties with the assistance of their learned counsel, have arrived at the settlement, the terms of which are reduced in writing and placed before us in the form of “Consent Terms ”. Mr.Attam Agarwal the authorized representative of the appellant-Company and Shri. Rajesh Panikar the elder son of Respondent No.1 are present before the Court. Shri. Rajesh Panikar states that the consent terms have been signed by his father and he and his brother are the witnesses for the same. We have gone through the consent terms and we are satisfied that they are just and reasonable. The consent terms are treated as the settlement between the parties under Section 2(p) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Consent terms are marked as Annexure-X for identification. 3. The learned counsel for the parties, therefore, pray for settlement of this appeal in terms of the consent terms. Hence, appeal is settled in terms of consent terms and disposed off accordingly. [ SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [ B.H.MARLAPALLE, J. ] 3