Bombay High Court

THE GOA HOUSING BOARD REP. THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN / BOARD OF DIRECTORSversusRAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA AND 2 ORS.,

Disposal: Disposed of

Holding

The court held that the consent terms are fair and binding, and ordered that a fresh decree be drawn in substitution of the earlier decree.

Summary

The Goa Housing Board and Rajendra Kumar Mishra executed consent terms on 1 October 2026, which were recorded in the court file and signed voluntarily. The terms relate to a development plan that has received provisional approval from the Town and Country Planning Department and final permission from the Cuncolim Municipal Council. The court examined the history of the dispute, originally arising from Civil Suit No.44/2009 and First Appeal No.39/2012, and found the consent terms to be fair to all parties. It ordered that the terms constitute a decree and that a fresh decree be drawn in substitution of the earlier decree dated 10 November 2023. Consequently, the review application was disposed, and the court directed the registry to prepare the new decree, also amending the cause title to drop Respondents 2 and 3.

Issues considered

Whether the consent terms executed by the parties are valid and can be incorporated as a decree in the pending civil proceedings.
Whether the review application can be disposed by substituting the earlier decree with a fresh decree based on the consent terms.

Subjects

consent terms
civil review
decree substitution
housing board
development plan approval
appeal

Judgment

                         902-CAREV-22 OF 2026.DOC




Suchitra

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

              CIVIL APPLICATION (REVIEW) NO.22/2026
                               IN
                     FIRST APPEAL NO.39/2012


 THE GOA HOUSING BOARD
 REP. THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN /
 BOARD OF DIRECTORS                                  … APPLICANT
       Versus
 RAJENDRA KUMAR
 MISHRA AND 2 ORS.                                  … RESPONDENTS

 Mr H. D. Naik, Advocate for the Applicant.

 Mr Sudesh Usgaonkar, Senior Advocate with Ms Marie Rosette
 Pereira, Advocate for the Respondent No.1.

 Ms S. Linhares, Additional Government Advocate for the
 Respondent State.

                    CORAM:            VALMIKI MENEZES, J.

                    DATED:            1st OCTOBER 2026

 P.C. :

1.         Consent Terms signed by the parties and their respective
Advocates, which are dated 01.10.2026, are placed on record.
he Consent Terms are marked ‘Y’ for identiication. he parties
have signed the same before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court
and are present in the Court today.               he Applicant – Goa
Housing Board, whose Managing Director Ms Siddhi Halarnkar
is present in the Court, admitted the execution of these Consent
Terms and the fact that they are executed by the Goa Housing
Board under Resolution dated 01.07.2026 passed by the Board.


                                   Page 1 of 3
                               1st October 2026
                       902-CAREV-22 OF 2026.DOC




2.    he Respondent Rajendra Kumar Mishra, who is the
original Plaintif in Civil Suit No.44/2009 and Respondent in
First Appeal No.39/2012, is also present and has admitted signing
these terms. All parties record that the terms are signed and
executed of their free-will and without any undue inluence/
coercion.


3.    After considering the entire history of the matter, which is
incidentally recorded in paragraphs 1 to 9 of the Consent Terms,
I am of the opinion that the Consent Terms are fair to all the
parties.


4.    he circumstances under which these Consent Terms are
iled in a Civil Review Application are also stated in the Consent
Terms and recorded in the order of 18.06.2026 of this Court.
hese Consent Terms which constitute a decree between the
parties, are executed in the original civil proceedings i.e. Civil Suit
No.44/2009.


5.    he plan referred to in the Consent Terms, which has
received Provisional Approval of the Town and Country Planning
Department, South Goa at Margao and has now received
approval/development permission from the Cuncolim Municipal
Council on 10.09.2026 is part of the record of the Review
Application and was marked ‘X’ by this Court on 18.06.2026 and
is on the ile. he plot in question is depicted in Red on the said
plan for identiication and the said plan produced on the ile of


                                 Page 2 of 3
                             1st October 2026
                                                       902-CAREV-22 OF 2026.DOC




                                  the Review Application and shall be treated as an integral part of
                                  the Consent Terms.


                                  6.    In view of the statement made in paragraph 11 of the
                                  Consent Terms, Respondent Nos.2 and 3 shall stand
                                  dropped/deleted. Amendment to the cause title shall be carried
                                  out forthwith.


                                  7.    he Review Application is disposed and a fresh decree shall
                                  be drawn up by the Appellate Court i.e. this Court, in First
                                  Appeal No.39/2012 in terms of the above “Consent Terms”.


                                  8.    Registry to act in terms of this order and draw a fresh
                                  decree which shall be in substitution of Decree dated 10.11.2023.


                                                                         VALMIKI MENEZES, J.




Signed by: SUCHITRA NANDAN                                       Page 3 of 3
SINGBAL                                                      1st October 2026
Designation: Personal Assistant
Date: 03/10/2026 14:54:21

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…