1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY & INTESTATE JURISDICTION TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO.106 OF 1998 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO.625 OF 1996 Sushila C. Raval ...Plaintiff. Vs. Aruna V. Raval ...Defendant. Mrs.Bina S. Shivane for the Plaintiff. Mr.V.S.Kapse for the Defendant. CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED :- 10th November, 2009. P.C.- 1 In a petition for Letters of Administration with the Will of deceased Champaklal Bhaishankar Rawal, the petitioner/wife and daughter in law of caveatrix have settled the matter amicably and, therefore, arrived at Consent Terms dated 10.11.2009, taken on record and marked “X” for identification purposes. The same is signed by both the parties along with their Advocates. The contents of the Consent Terms are explained to the petitioner. She has understood the same as recorded. 2 The learned counsel appearing for the parties make statement that the consent Terms are well within the frame work of law and the record. 2 3 There is no dispute about signature, identification and authorization. There are no other persons involved and/or affected by this consent Terms as they have already given consent/no objection in favour of the petitioner. 4 The parties are present in the Court. 5 In view of this, the present Testamentary Petition is disposed of in terms of consent Terms. 6 Resultantly, the caveat/objection stands dismissed as withdrawn. 7 The Office to proceed the Petition in accordance with law. Certified copy is expedited. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)