76-WP1979-2026.DOC Santosh IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1979 OF 2026 Deepak Builders ...Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and Ors. …Respondents Mr. Dharmesh Jain, a/w Arpita Tiwari, for the Petitioner. Mr. Rupali Gupta, i/b Lakshyavedhi Legal, for Respondent No.3. Mr. Manish Upadhye, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2-State of Maharashtra. CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATED: 7th SEPTEMBER, 2026 Oral Order:- 1. Heard the learned Counsels for the parties. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the petition qua respondent Nos.4 to 7, who were permitted to be added pursuant to the order dated 22nd February, 2025. 3. It does not appear that respondent Nos.4 to 7, who were impleaded as party respondents before the Competent Authority have challenged the order passed by the Competent Authority dated 5th April, 2024, thereby directing execution of deemed conveyance in favour of respondent No. 3 Society. 1/3 SANTOSH SUBHASH KULKARNI Digitally signed by SANTOSH SUBHASH KULKARNI Date: 2026.09.08 10:16:40 +0530 76-WP1979-2026.DOC 4. Leave granted. 5. Necessary amendment be carried out forthwith. 6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.3 – Society submit that the petitioner and respondent No.3 - Society, have amicably resolved the dispute and Consent Terms have been executed. 7. The learned counsel for the parties seek leave tender the Consent Terms. 8. Mr. Dineshkumar D. Jain and Mr. Rameshbhai D. Jain, the partners of the petitioner, Mr. Arvindkumar Oza, Chairperson of Respondent No.3 Society, Ms. Usha Shukla, Secretary of Respondent No.3 Society and Mr. Vinay Shukla, Treasurer of Respondent No.3 Society, are present before the Court. The parties submit that they have read and understood the contents of the Consent Terms. The parties admit the contents of the Consent Terms and execution thereof. 9. Upon being specifically inquired, the office bearers of respondent No.3 Society submit that, they are agreeable for conveyance of 1450 Sq. Mtrs. area instead of 2176.16 Sq. Mtrs. granted by the Competent Authority by the impugned order. 2/3 76-WP1979-2026.DOC 10. It appears that the parties have voluntarily executed the Consent Terms and there is no coercion or duress. The parties are identified by their respective Advocates. It seems that the parties have decided to resolve all the disputes and a comprehensive settlement has been arrived at between the parties. 11. The Consent Terms are thus taken on record and marked ‘X’. 12. The petition stands disposed in accordance with the Consent Terms ‘X’. 13. The impugned order shall stand modified in accordance with the Consent Terms ‘X’ to the extent of the area of the property in respect of which deemed conveyance has been granted. 14. The undertakings given in the Consent Terms ‘X’ are accepted as undertakings to the Court. The petition stands disposed. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] 3/3