IN THE HIGH COUT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 71 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICTION NO. 1792 OF 2008 Vaijayanta Bapu Atapadkar & anr. .... Appellants Vs. Smt. Mangal Krushna Mahadu Kalel & ors .... Respondents Mr. Dilip Bodake Adv. For the appellant Mr. V. V. Pai Adv. For the respondent no.1 & 2. CORAM : R.G. KETKAR, J. DATE : 22nd June, 2010. P.C. : 1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant nos. 1 to 3 who are original plaintiffs and appellant nos.4 and 5 who are original defendant nos.3 and 4 challenging the judgment and decree dated 23rd June 2008 passed by the Principal District Judge, Satara in Regular Civil Appeal no.217/01 arising out of the judgment and decree dated 2nd July 2001 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Dahiwadi, in regular Civil Suit no. 251/94 whereby the lower appellate court was pleased to allow the appeal preferred by appellant nos. 4 and 5 ­original defendant nos.1 and 2 and dismissed the suit instituted by the appellant nos.1 to 3­original plaintiffs. 2. Heard Mr. Bodake, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr V. V. Pai, learned counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2. They state that the controversy between the parties is resolved in terms of the consent terms and the impugned judgment and decree passed by the courts below be set aside and the same may be substituted in terms of the consent term dated 22d June 2010. They further pray that decree may be drawn in terms of consent terms dated 22nd June 2010. 3. It is further pointed out that the consent terms are signed by all the appellants and also the respondents and also their respective advocates. Appellate no.3 Suman and appellant no.4 Ashok and respondent no.2 Manisha are present in the court. 4. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and after going through the consent terms in writing and duly signed by the parties as also their advocates, I am satisfied that the entire dispute is wholly adjusted in terms of the compromise in writing and signed by the parties. The compromise terms are taken on record and marked as `X’ for identification. 5. In view of this, the impugned judgments and decrees passed by the courts below are set aside and the same are substituted in terms of consent terms dated 22nd June 2010. The decree be drawn accordingly. Second Appeal stands disposed of in terms of consent terms with no order as to costs. Appellant nos. 3 and 4 are present and they represent appellant nos. 1,2 and 5. Likewise respondent no.2 is present and represent respondent no.1. In C.A. No. 1792/08. In view of the dismissal of Second Appeal, no orders in Civil Application are necessary and the same is also therefore dismissed. [R.G. KETKAR, J.]