40-CRA-476-2008 (C).docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 476 OF 2008 1A Raghav Yogesh Heda 1B Rishi Yogesh Heda 2 Sou. Preeti Yogesh Heda 3 Smt. Kashibai Mohanlal Heda (Since deceased) Through Applicant Nos.1A & 1B 4 Smt. Gangabai Devkisan Heda (Since deceased) Through LRs 4A Yogesh Nandlal Heda 5 Kisanpyari Nandlal Heda … Applicants Versus 1 Yusuf Mahammad Kapse (Since deceased) Through LRs 1A Smt. Shantabai Yusuf Kapse (Deceased) 1B Babasaheb Yusuf Kapse 1C Sou. Sujata Rajahan Thorvat … Respondents ---- Mr. S.C. Mangle a/w. Mr. Ashitosh S. Jambilkar i/b. Mr. C.G. Gavnekar for the Applicants. Mr. Gajraj A. Mali i/b. Mr. Chetan G. Patil for the Respondent Nos.1B & 1C. ------- Coram : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. Date : 10th September 2026. osk 1 of 5 40-CRA-476-2008 (C).docx Oral Order: 1. Heard Mr. S. C. Mangle, learned Advocate for the Applicants and Mr. Gajraj A. Mali, learned Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1B & 1C. 2. By this Civil Revision Application, the Applicants have sought the following substantive relief in prayer clause (b), which is reproduced verbatim : “(b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned Judgment and order dated 27.3.2008 passed by the Learned 3rd Adhoc District Judge, Kolhapur in Regular Civil Appeal No.334 of 2004 and further be pleased to allow Regular Civil Appeal No. 334 of 2004.” 3. Today, by a separate order dated 10th September 2026, Interim Application No. 1409 of 2026 is allowed in terms of the prayer clauses (a) and (b) therein and Applicant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have been substituted for the original Applicant Nos. 1(a) to 1(g) & 5A. Mr. S. C. Mangle, learned Advocate for the Applicants, states that the amendment is carried out in terms of the order dated 10th September 2026 in Interim Application No. 1409 of 2026. 4. Mr. S. C. Mangle, learned Advocate for the Applicants and Mr. Gajraj Mali, learned Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1B & 1C, jointly state that the subject matter of the dispute in this Revision Application has been amicably osk 2 of 5 40-CRA-476-2008 (C).docx resolved and the parties seek permission to place the Consent Terms on record of this Application. 5. Mr. S. C. Mangle, learned Advocate for the Applicants, states that Applicant No. 4A ( Yogesh Nandlal Heda) appears for himself and for the Applicant Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5, being their constituted Attorney, constituted vide Power of Attorney dated 8th September 2026. He states that Applicant No. 4A is present in Court and that he identifies Applicant No. 4A. 6. Mr. Gajraj Mali, learned Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1B & 1C states that the Respondent Nos.1B & 1C are present in Court and he identifies them. 7. Mr. S. C. Mangle, learned Advocate for the Applicants and Mr. Gajraj Mali, learned Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1B & 1C, jointly tender the Consent Terms dated 10th September 2026, signed by Applicant No. 4A for himself and as constituted attorney of Applicant Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 5 and by Respondent Nos. 1B & 1C. Mr. S. C. Mangle, learned Advocate for the Applicants and Mr. Gajraj Mali, learned Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1B & 1C, state that the Advocates on record for the Applicants and the Respondents have signed the Consent Terms dated 10th September 2026. 8. Appended to the Consent Term dated 10th September 2026 are the identity cards of Applicant No. 4A and Respondent Nos. 1B & 1C, as also a osk 3 of 5 40-CRA-476-2008 (C).docx photostat copy of the Power of Attorney dated 8th September 2026, duly certified by Mr. S. C. Mangle, learned Advocate for the Applicants. The consent terms, along with the documents (page Nos. 1 to 27), are taken on record and collectively marked with “X” for identification. 9. Mr. S. C. Mangle, learned Advocate for the Applicants and Mr. Gajraj Mali, learned Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1B & 1C, state that the Applicants and the Respondent Nos. 1B & 1C are the only parties with an interest in the dispute which is the subject matter of this Revision Application and that the consent terms (“X”) bind the parties to these proceedings. 10. Applicant No. 4A and Respondent Nos. 1B & 1C, who are present in Court, identified by their respective Advocates appearing today, state that they have signed the Consent Terms (“X”) voluntarily, of their own free will, without any force or coercion from any person. They further state that the contents of the Consent Terms (“X”) reflect the settlement entered into between them. 11. Mr S. C. Mangle, learned Advocate for the Applicants and Mr Gajaraj Mali, learned Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1B & 1C, state that the Civil Revision Application be disposed of by accepting the Consent Terms (“X”). 12. The contents of the Consent Terms (“X”) do not indicate that the settlement is contrary to public policy. osk 4 of 5 40-CRA-476-2008 (C).docx 13. By recording the statements of Mr. S. C. Mangle, learned Advocate for the Applicants and Mr. Gajaraj Mali, learned Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1B & 1C and the statements made by the parties present today, the Consent Terms dated 10th September 2026 (“X”) are accepted. 14. Civil Revision Application No. 476 of 2008 stands disposed of in terms of the Consent Terms dated 10th September 2026. 15. No orders as to costs. [ ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. ] osk 5 of 5 OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Digitally signed by OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Date: 2026.09.11 12:18:07 +0530