Sadashivrao Shyamrao Wath And Others. v. Vinod Baliram Tikle And Another.

218-WP-3291-04 1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO.3291 OF 2004 Sadashiv Shyamrao Wath & Ors.

-vsVinod Baliram Tikle & Anr.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.

or directions and Registrar's orders.

Shri A. Shelat, Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Anand Gode, Advocate for respondents.

CORAM : A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.

DATE : JUNE 16, 2015 Present proceedings arise out of an order passed under provisions of 41-D of Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The petitioners have filed Civil Application No.777 of 2015 to bring on record certain subsequent events. Said application is allowed.

A joint pursis dated 20/04/2015 signed by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for respondents has been filed on record. It has been stated therein that during pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived at amicable settlement of the dispute. However some modalities of said settlement are under process of finalization and hence the parties presently do not desire to proceed with the application filed by the present respondents under provisions of Section 41-D of the said Act. It has also been stated that after the terms of compromise are finalized, the parties would make suitable application in the matter before the learned Joint Charity Commissioner. In view aforesaid,

218-WP-3291-04 2/2 the writ petition stands disposed of in terms of joint pursis dated 20/04/2015.

Needless to state that till the terms of compromise are finalized between the parties, proceedings arising under Section 41-D of the said Act in Enquiry Case No.10 of 2004 shall remain stayed. Parties are at liberty to move the learned Jt. Charity Commissioner for disposal of said proceedings after the compromise is finalized. Rule is disposed of in aforesaid terms. No order as to costs.

JUDGE Asmita