IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Writ petition No.1878 of 2007 Dinesh Tulsidas Shah ..Petitioner vs. Shri Dhirajlal Doshi ...Respondents Mr.Rajesh Gehani for petitioner. Mr.Vinod Shah for respondents. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. J. J. 23rd June 2008 23rd June 2008 23rd June 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Petitioner is management and the respondent is workman. 2. After the matter was pending before this Court the parties negotiated settlement of their dispute and have entered into the terms. The terms are finalised by consent and willingly. Both sides have understood the implications of the terms and respective obligations. They have fully understood that the consent terms provide for payment by the petitioner which shall be accepted in full and final settlement by the respondent of all claims provided the balance sum as stipulated in clauses 2 and 3 of the terms is paid in the manner set out therein. If the payments are duly received in as much as the cheques are encashed all claims come to an end and the amounts are accepted in full and final settlement. Thereupon all proceedings also come to an end. Both sides agree that till cheques are encashed the respondent workman will not take any coercive measures to recover the sums and all recovery proceedings shall be held in abeyance till then. The consent terms are duly signed by the petitioner and his advocate so also by the respondent and his Advocate. Both of them are present in Court and confirm the arrangement. The said consent terms are taken on record and marked "X" for identification. Order in terms of the consent terms at "X". 3. In view of disposal of the writ petition in terms of the consent terms notice of motion no.227 of 2008 does not survive and hence dismissed as such. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)