1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. SUIT NO.1109 OF 1984 Gurudas Manjunath Koneri ..Plaintiff. Vs. Ramanath Manjunath Koneri and another ..Defendants. WITH SUIT NO.2701 OF 1988 Ramanath Manjunath Koneri ..Plaintiff. Vs. Gurudas Manjunath Koneri ..Defendant. .... Mr. S.S. Lanke for the Plaintiff in Suit 1109/84 and for the Defendant in Suit 2701/88. Mr. H.S.S. Murthy for Defendant No.1 in Suit 1109/84 and for the Plaintiff in Suit 2701/88. Mr. Manish Upadhye for Defendant No.2 in Suit 1109/84. .... CORAM: DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 9th April, 2009. P.C. : When the suits were placed on Board, on the suggestion of 2 the Court both the learned counsel had agreed to keep the respective clients present with a view to enable them to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement. The Plaintiff and Defendant are brothers and the entire dispute is in relation to a small residential flat. During the course of the hearing, extensive discussions have taken place between the parties and their advocates. Consent Terms signed by the parties and by their advocates are taken on record and marked as ‘X.’ The Consent Terms have been explained to and understood by the parties and the Court has been informed that the parties and the learned advocates are of the view that this would be in the best interest of both the brothers and their families. Since the dispute has been settled, there shall be a decree and order in terms of the Consent Terms which are taken on record and marked as ‘X’. The Suits shall stand disposed of. The undertakings contained in the Consent Terms are accepted. ***** 3