Sundarbai Baban Andhale v. Mandakini Baban Andhale And Other

P4-MPT59-08.DOC ATUL

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 59 OF 2008 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 765 OF 2004 Sundarabai Baban Andhale

...Petitioner

Versus

Mandakini Baban Andhale & Another

...Respondents

Mr. Kashinath K. Jadhav, for the Petitioner.

Mr. Mohan Gawde, for the Respondents.

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED:

20th October 2016 PC:- 1.

The revocation Petition is settled out of Court. Consent Terms are drawn up. These are signed by the Petitioner and her Advocate and the Respondent No. 1 and her Advocate. The Petitioner and Respondent No. 1 are present in Court. The Consent Terms have also been interpreted to the parties in Marathi. 2.

By these Consent Terms, the revocation Petition is sought to be disposed of upon the revocation Petitioner giving up her claims and in lieu of which she has been compensated by the Respondent to the revocation Petition. The Consent Terms are taken on record and 20th October 2016

P4-MPT59-08.DOC marked "X" for identification. The undertakings, if any, in the Consent Terms are accepted as undertakings to the Court. 3.

The revocation Petition is disposed of in accordance with the Consent Terms. Drawn up order dispensed with. 4.

Refund of court fee in accordance with the Rules. 5.

All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order. (G. S. PATEL, J.) 20th October 2016