1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY & ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 4153 OF 2008 IN COURT RECEIVER'S REPORT NO. 372 OF 2008 IN CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 2067 OF 2007 IN EXECUTION APPLICATION (LODG.)NO.510 OF 2003 IN SUIT NO. 4491 OF 1996 Renuka Mohan Dhir. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Unicorn Fantasies & Anr. ... Defendants. And The Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay. ... Respondent. And M/s. Citi Link ... Assignees. And Bombay Surgical Works. ... Applicant. And Brihanmumbai Mahanagar Palika. ... Respondent. Mr. S.J. Khera for Respondents 9 and 11 and in support of Notice of Motion. Mr. H.S.S. Murthy in Support of CHS 1034/09. Ms. Puja Acharekar i/b. JMB Partners for Respondents 4,7,13 & 14 in support of CHS 1354/09. Mr. Harshad Bhadbhade for Respondents 2 to 7. Mr. K.T. Cooper i/b. S.J. Khera for Respondent 1o. Mr. G.G. Ketkar, 1st Asstt. to Court Receiver present. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 22nd SEPTEMBER 2009. 2 P.C. :- This is a Motion which is taken out by the Assignee for the relief including order and directions to the Court Receiver to file affidavit in rejoinder to the Stay Application in the Civil Revision Application which is pending in the Small Causes Court at Bombay. 2. The basis of the Application is that the Applicant/Assignee has, by a Deed of Assignment dated 17th October 2003 executed by the Plaintiff in his favour obtained the benefits of the decree passed in the aforesaid Suit. 3. It is stated that he moved a Chamber Summons in the Execution Application for being substituted and the Chamber Summons has been made absolute by this Court. 4. Thereafter, he has raised diverse pleas with regard to the proceedings which are pending. He has made allegations against the Applicant, one Bombay Surgical Works. 5. When this Motion was argued on the last occasion, I made it clear to the learned Counsel appearing in support that if there is any dispute as between the Assignee and the Applicant/Landlord, the forum that the Assignee has chosen is not appropriate for resolution thereof, with a view to have appropriate relief the remedy is to approach Competent Court by filing appropriate proceedings including their own 3 substantive Suit. Further, the Court cannot grant any reliefs in the present Motion on the basis that the Assignee has obtained the rights of the Plaintiff / Decree Holder. Assuming that such rights are confirmed so also the benefits, nothing prevents the Assignee from instituting his own proceedings as against parties who are stated to be in occupation of the premises. The Notice of Motion is, therefore, misconceived and is disposed off but with liberty to the Assignee to initiate such proceedings as are permissible in law. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the pleas raised and all contentions of parties to the present Motion in that behalf are kept open. 6. Upon a query from the Court, the Court Receiver has stated that if any steps are required to be taken in the pending Civil Revision Application, he would take the same as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of four weeks from today. The Motion is disposed off subject to above. No order as to costs. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)