Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

RAJU PURSHOTTAM SADARANGANI AND OTHERSversusJUSYA PROPERTY DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The court held that duly executed and verified consent terms are binding on the parties and may be used to dispose of the suit, while non‑signatories remain unaffected.

Summary

The plaintiffs sought to delete Defendant Nos.2, 3 and 4, identified as proforma parties, from the suit title. Both parties then executed Consent Terms resolving all disputes between the plaintiffs and Defendant No.1, which were verified by the court’s associate as voluntarily signed without coercion. The court recorded the Consent Terms, accepted the undertakings as binding on the signatories, and expressly noted that they do not bind any non‑signatory or third party. Consequently, the suit was disposed of in accordance with the Consent Terms, with the hard copy retained on file and any court fees refunded as per rules. All pending applications were also dismissed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the court may order deletion of proforma parties from the cause title.
  • Whether consent terms, once executed and verified, are binding on the parties and sufficient to dispose of the suit.
  • Whether non‑signatories can be bound by the consent terms.

Subjects

  • consent terms
  • settlement
  • proforma parties
  • civil procedure
  • suit disposal
  • court fees

Judgment

                                                  1/2                     2-IA-6520-2025.DOC


        Digitally
        signed by
        VAIBHAV
VAIBHAV NAMDEV
NAMDEV BARE
BARE    Date:               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
        2026.08.21
        11:32:18
        +0530                  ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION


                               INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6520 OF 2025
                                                  IN
                                         SUIT NO. 65 OF 2025
         Raju Purshottam Sadarangani And Ors.                    ...Applicants/Plaintiffs
                   Versus
         Jusya Property Developers Pvt. Ltd. And Ors.            ...Defendants
                                               _______
         Ms. Shreya Karande i/b Ms. Devyani Kulkarni, for the Applicants/Plaintiffs.
         Mr. Narayan N. Jayale, for Defendant No.1.
         Mr. Raju Sadarangani, Plaintiff No.1 and Mr. Rajendra Tiwari, Plaintiff No.2,
         present in person.
         Mr. Chandan Mishra, Defendant No.1, present.
                                               _______


                                                        CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
                                                        DATE    : 19th AUGUST, 2026


         P.C.
         1.        At the outset, learned counsel for the Applicant/Plaintiff submits that

         Defendant Nos.2, 3 and 4 are proforma parties and prays for leave to delete the

         name of Defendant Nos.2, 3 and 4 from the cause title of the Suit. He is at liberty

         to do so within a period of one week from today. Consequently, all references to

         Defendant Nos.2, 3 and 4 in the Suit as also the prayer clauses shall stand

         deleted.

         2.        Learned counsel then tendered Consent Terms by which they submit that

         all disputes and differences between the Applicants/Plaintiffs and Defendant




         Vaibhav
                                                 2/2                       2-IA-6520-2025.DOC



No.1 have been amicably resolved. The execution of the Consent Terms is

supported by a report of the Associate of this Court, which reads thus:

              "The Plaintiffs and Director of Defendant No.1 have admitted the contents of
          the Consent Terms. The Consent Terms are duly signed by the Plaintiffs and
          Defendant No.1 out of their free will, without any undue influence and coercion.
          The signatories have duly executed the consent terms. "

3.        It is noted that the Consent Terms have been duly executed. The same are

marked as “X” for identification and taken on record.

4.        The undertakings given in the Consent Terms are accepted as

undertakings given to the Court.

5.        It is made expressly clear that these Consent Terms shall bind only the

parties to the Consent Terms and shall not in any manner be binding upon any

non-signatory and/or third-party to the Consent Terms. Furthermore, the

Consent Terms shall also not travel beyond the Suit.

6.        The Suit is accordingly disposed of in terms of the Consent Terms.

7.        A soft copy of the Consent Terms will be uploaded as the second order in

the matter. The Registry is to ensure that the hard copy of the signed Consent

Terms is permanently retained on file as part of the record and is not sent for

destruction in the ordinary course.

8.        Refund of Court fees, if any, as per rules.

9.        All pending applications are disposed of.




                                                                         [ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.]




Vaibhav


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.