IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA SECOND APPEAL NO. 88 OF 2007 SHRI. ABDUL KHALID CAROL ... Appellant Versus MEGHASHYAM S. SALGAOKAR AND 7 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Valmiki Menezes,Advocate for the appellant. Mr. S. D. Lotlikar, Senior Advocate with Ms. Xettigar, Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 To 8. Coram:- U. D. SALVI, J. Date:- 17th February, 2010 P.C. Heard. Prayer is made for deleting the respondent No.4 Shilpa Vithal Salgaonkar, legal heir of the deceased respondent No.3 Vithal Sakharam Salgaonkar. It is submitted that this is being done to facilitate amicable settlement between the parties. It is further submitted on behalf of the appellant that the respondent No.4 Shilpa Salgaonkar is not residing in the suit premises and her deletion from the present appeal would, therefore, not matter much except facilitating an amicable settlement between others. Deletion is permitted. Appellant to carry out necessary amendment forthwith. 2. Upon deletion of the respondent No.4, consent terms between others are tendered. The appellant is present. He confirms the consent terms dated 17.02.2010 tendered today. Learned Senior Advocate Lotlikar representing the respondent Nos.1,2,5,6,7 and 8 makes a statement on behalf of the said respondents that the agreement to provide an access as shown in the consent terms has been arrived at between the parties. He confirms the consent terms on behalf of the said respondents. Consent terms along with plan annexed to it is taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. Second Appeal is disposed of in terms of the said consent terms with no order as to costs. U. D. SALVI, J. SMA