← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/1607/1999compromisedconsent terms

Ismail Yusuf Mujawar v. Shrirang V. Shirsat And ANR.

2016-12-01Hon'Ble Shri Justice Nitin Jamdar2 pages

208. WP 1607.99.doc JPP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1607 OF 1999 Ismail Yusuf Mujawar.

... Petitioner.

V/s.

Shrirang Vasudev Shirsat & Anr.

... Respondents.

Mr. S.M. Railkar for the Petitioner.

Mr. Amogh Karandikar a/w. Lokesh Zade i/b. A.S. Khandeparkar for the Respondents.

CORAM : N.M. Jamdar, J.

01 December, 2016.

Oral Order :- The learned Counsel for the parties state that the parties have amicably resolved their dispute and have executed consent terms, which have been signed by the respective Power of Attorney holders of the parties. The learned Counsel for the parties state that the Power of Attorney holders are present in the Court. At their request, the consent terms are taken on record and marked 'X' for identification.

208. WP 1607.99.doc 2.

Subject to the verification of the Power of Attorneys by the Registry, the Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the consent terms. The undertakings are accepted.

3.

The learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that the cheque of Rs.50,000/- as provided in the consent terms has been handed over.

(N.M. Jamdar, J.)