HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
SUNIL KISHANLAL SOI(H.U.F.)AND 19 ORS – Appellant
Versus
SHIRISH GIRISH DIKSHIT AND 24 ORS – Respondent
NMS/2185/2015
4-S-1097-2015+.DOC
Arun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO. 1097 OF 2015
Sunil Kishan Lal Soi (HUF) & Ors
…Plaintiffs
Versus
Shirish Girish Dikshit & Ors
…Defendants
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 15900 OF 2021
IN
SUIT NO. 1097 OF 2015
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 15260 OF 2021
IN
SUIT NO. 1097 OF 2015
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1423 OF 2021
IN
SUIT NO. 1097 OF 2015
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2185 OF 2015
IN
SUIT NO. 1097 OF 2015
WITH
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 921 OF 2018
Page 1 of 5
5th August 2021
ARUN
RAMCHNDRA
SANKPAL
Digitally
signed by
ARUN
RAMCHNDRA
SANKPAL
Date:
2021.08.06
09:58:21
+0530
4-S-1097-2015+.DOC
IN
SUIT NO. 1097 OF 2015
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3020 OF 2016
IN
SUIT NO.1097 OF 2015
WITH
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 167 OF 2019
IN
SUIT NO.1097 OF 2015
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1497 OF 2019
IN
SUIT NO. 1097 OF 2015
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 876 OF 2016
IN
SUIT NO. 1097 OF 2015
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1526 OF 2017
IN
SUIT NO. 1097 OF 2015
Ms Saakshi Saboo, i/b Raval-Shah & Co, for the Plaintiffs.
Mrs Veena C Khatri, for Defendants Nos. 1 to 3.
Mr Rohaan Cama, with Ishwar Nankani and Huzefa Khokhawala,
Page 2 of 5
5th August 2021
4-S-1097-2015+.DOC
i/b Nankani &
Associates, for Defendants Nos. 4 to 23.
Mr JK Shah, with
Archit Manurkar, Defendant No.25.
Mr S Amre, for the Intervenor.
CORAM:G.S. PATEL, J
DATED: 5th August 2021
PC:-
1.
This is further to the order of 16th July 2021. Paragraphs 2, 3
and 4 of the order read thus:
“2. Consent Terms were drawn up between the parties
sometime in October 2020. On 30th March 2021, there was
an order of this Court requiring the Prothonotary & Senior
Master to designate an officer to verify the identity of the
parties and the execution of the Consent Terms. Ms Swati
Tari has done this exercise. She has prepared a report. For
most of the Plaintiffs, she has verified their identities. There
are others who passed away, some after signing the Consent
Terms. There are also some who had passed away, but
whose heirs signed the Consent Terms. There are three sets
of heirs of deceased Plaintiffs who are yet to sign the
Consent Terms. At this stage, therefore, I allow all
applications for amendment, without need of reverification.
Those amendments are to be carried out on or before 26th
July 2021. The remaining signatures, including of the newly
added parties, are to be obtained by 2nd August 2021.
There will be no need for further verification by a Court
Officer, provided that the Advocate on record for the
Plaintiff files a short Affidavit confirming that the Advocate
has personally satisfied himself or herself about the identity
of these new signatories.
3.
The matter will be listed on 6th August 2021 for final
orders on the Consent Terms.
Page 3 of 5
5th August 2021
4-S-1097-2015+.DOC
4.
The Applicant has filed Suit (L) No. 10038 of 2021.
Any order in terms of the Consent Terms will be without
prejudice to his rights and contentions in this fresh Suit.
”
2.
I am told that all the amendments have been carried out and
the necessary signatures have been obtained. There is already an
Affidavit by the Advocate for the Plaintiff as directed in paragraph 4
of the earlier order.
3.
Accordingly, the Suit is disposed of with an order in terms of
the Consent Terms. These Consent Terms are taken on record and
marked
“X” for identification with today’s date.
4.
The undertakings in the Consent Terms are accepted as
undertakings to the Court.
5.
Parties agree that the Receiver is to stand discharged without
passing accounts but on payment of his costs, charges and expenses
by the Plaintiffs within three weeks from today.
6.
In Clause 23(d) of the Consent Terms there is a blank after
the word ‘schedule’. This is a typographical error. In fact, there is
only one schedule. This is noted.
7.
Liberty to the parties to lodge a certified or authenticated
copy of the Consent Terms as also a certified o