1 acd IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1721 OF 2001 Hatim Suterwalla . ...Plaintiff. Vs. Venkatesh Chemi-Colour Co. & Ors. .. Defendants. ---- Mr. Gaurang Mehta, for the Plaintiff. Mr. Nivit Srivastav i/b N.K. Nesari, for Defendant No.1. None for the other Defendants. ---- CORAM: R.Y. GANOO J. DATED : 23RD MARCH, 2010 The court is informed that Defendant No.4 has expired. His heirs are not brought on record. Order will have to be passed so far as abatement of suit against Defendant No.4 is concerned. The consent terms dated 9.2.2010 signed by the Plaintiff and by Mr. D.J. Sarvaiya in his capacity as a partner of Defendant No.1 and their respective Advocates are taken on recored. Since Defendant No.1 is a firm, learned Advocate appearing for the Plaintiff states that decree against Defendant No.1 would be sufficient for the Plaintiff. Learned Advocates prayed for a decree in terms of consent terms. P.C.: 1. As the heirs of Defendant No.4 are not brought on record, suit is abated so far as Defendant No.4 is concerned. The consent terms are taken 2 on record and marked ‘X’ for identification. There shall be a decree in terms of consent terms as between the Plaintiff and Defendant No.1. The suit is allowed to be withdrawn as far as Defendant Nos.2,3,5,6,7 and 8 are concerned. There shall be no order as to costs. 2. Refund of court fees is granted as per rules. (R.Y. GANOO J.)