Armin Wandrewala v. Pujit Agarwal

905-INOT2-16+.DOC ATUL

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INSOLVENCY NOTICE NO. 2 OF 2016 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 22 OF 2016 Pujit Aggarwal ...Applicant In the matter of Re: Pujit Aggarwal ...Judgment Debtor Ex parte:

Pouruchis P. Bhiwandiwala ...Judgment Creditor INSOLVENCY NOTICE NO. 3 OF 2016 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 23 OF 2016 Pujit Aggarwal ...Applicant In the matter of Re: Pujit Aggarwal ...Judgment Debtor Ex parte:

Armin Wandrewala ...Judgment Creditor Ms. Armin Wandrewala, Constituted Attorney of the Petitioning Creditor in NMIS/22/2016 & Petitioning Creditor in NMIS/23/3016.

Ms. Veena Khatri, with Mr. Yogesh Gaikwad, for the Judgment Debtor.

23rd June 2016

905-INOT2-16+.DOC CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED:

23rd June 2016 PC:- 1.

Heard Ms. Wandrewala, who appears in person in Notice of Motion No. 23 of 2016 and as a Constituted Attorney for the Petitioning Creditor in Notice of Motion No. 22 of 2016. 2.

Ms. Wandrewala points out that the Petitioning Creditors' claims have been satisfied in full. Pay orders have been received and realized. Consent Terms were filed in Contempt Petition No. 7 of 2016 in Suit No. 2119 of 2008 before Mr. Justice S.J. Kathawalla, and order thereon was passed on 22nd June 2015. I am shown a copy of the Consent Terms in the Contempt Petition. Ms. Wandrewala correctly points out that paragraph 2(c) of these Consent Terms requires that upon realization of these pay orders, both Insolvency Applications and Insolvency Notices are required to be withdrawn.

3.

It is in these circumstances that she seeks an unconditional withdrawal of both the Insolvency Applications and Insolvency Notices. In view thereof, the Insolvency Applications and Insolvency Notices are allowed to be withdrawn and disposed of in these terms with no order as to costs.

4.

In view of this, the Notices of Motions do not survive and are disposed of as such.

(G. S. PATEL, J.) 23rd June 2016