1 nms2222-10 vai IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2222 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO.2167 OF 2010 Atul Karamshibhai Dedhia ....Plaintiff V/s. Lalit Chimanlal Shah & Anr. ....Defendants Mr.J.S. Kini i/b Mr.Suresh Dubey for the Plaintiff. Mr.D.A. Barot for the Defendants. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 23RD NOVEMBER, 2011. P.C. :- 1. The plaintiff and the defendants were the partners, who carried on the business in the firm name and style of M/s.Orbis Optik. They referred the disputes and differences between them to arbitration. An award in terms of the consent terms dated 7.5.2010 signed by the parties and their advocates was passed. The award was in terms of the consent terms. To grant the interim reliefs sought today would be contrary to the award and would amount to reopening the consent terms. Clause 1 declared the firm has having been dissolved. Clause 2 recorded that the accounts had been settled and that each of 2 nms2222-10 the partners had received their shares in the business and that none of them had any claim of whatsoever nature against the other. Clause 9 reiterated the same. 2. By clause 3, the parties agreed that the defendants would vacate the tenanted premises and hand over the same to the plaintiff within a period of two months and upon receipt of a sum of Rs.57.00 lacs, which was to be paid by the plaintiff within a period of two months. Clause 4 contended that upon receipt of Rs.57.00 lacs, the defendants would surrender the rights in respect of the tenanted premises in favour of the plaintiff and the plaintiff would become the sole and absolute tenant in respect of the said shop. The plaintiff has admittedly not paid the amount of Rs.57.00 lacs. The plaintiff states that he is unable to do and that he will not be able to pay the said amount. 3. The suit is filed for a declaration that as the plaintiff is unable to and refuses to pay the sum of Rs.57.00 lacs he continues to have a 1/3rd share in the tenanted premises. He therefore, seeks the appointment of a Court Receiver. The plaintiff having admittedly refused to comply with his obligations under the content terms, is not entitled to any interim reliefs. The clauses relating to the payment in lieu of the defendants having agreed to surrender their tenancy rights cannot be read in isolation. The defendants have given up all their other rights in consideration of the reciprocal obligations undertaken by the parties contemplated in the consent terms. 3 nms2222-10 4. In the circumstances, the notice of motion is dismissed.