#consent terms

The Bombay High Court has ruled that anticipatory bail granted on the basis of settlement or consent terms cannot be cancelled merely due to alleged breach of those terms. This clarifies that bail under Section 438 CrPC is a statutory right tied to the risk of arrest, not contractual compliance, protecting accused persons from being penalized for post-bail negotiations.

NCLAT rules that a financial creditor can revive Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) if the corporate debtor breaches court-recorded settlement terms, treating non-compliance as a material default. This reinforces strict adherence to settlement agreements under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, impacting creditors' rights to reinitiate insolvency proceedings.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that funds deposited by a corporate debtor under court-approved consent terms remain available to creditors even after the company’s dissolution, as the deposit constitutes a secured claim protected by judicial oversight. This clarifies that court-monitored deposits are not extinguished by corporate winding-up, reinforcing creditor protections in insolvency proceedings.

Bombay High Court enforces a 55:45 split of pension, gratuity, and PF between two wives of a deceased employee, binding MTNL to the consent terms. The ruling underscores the legal validity of private agreements in inheritance disputes, even where probate proceedings are contested, and prioritizes medical urgency in disbursement.

Bombay High Court holds that rights under a registered PAAA cannot be extinguished by consent terms in a suit where the PAAA holder is not a party.

Bombay High Court holds that consent terms in testamentary suits can dispose of proceedings without a formal decree, provided they are voluntary, lawful, and recorded on record.

Bombay High Court affirms that consent terms in testamentary suits are binding undertakings to the court, enforceable as court orders with no need for separate decree.