1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.74 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO.3258 OF 2009 Sai Service Agency (Bombay) Ltd. Plaintiff versus Dr.Sandhya Manjrekar Defendant Mr.Tanvir Shaikh for plaintiff. None for the defendant. CORAM : S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 9th February 2011 PC : 1. Heard learned advocate for the plaintiff. The defendant has not appeared before this Court, though served. An affidavit proving service dated 15th February 2010 is on record. 2. By this Notice of Motion the plaintiff is seeking permission of this Court to sell and dispose of the vehicle of the defendant namely Maruti Wagon, bearing registration number MH-31-CM-4777 ("the said car") and to adjust the sale proceeds towards their outstanding charges. 3. According to the plaintiff, on 15th April 2007 the defendant brought the said car to the plaintiff's repairing centre at Borivali. The defendant informed the plaintiff that the said car has met with an accident and requires refurbishing, repairs and servicing. The plaintiff vide its Job Card No.6361/PB informed the defendant that the charges for inspection and giving estimate would be Rs.2,500/-. Further the defendant was informed that in the event he does not agree with the estimate provided by the 2 plaintiff and therefore does not wish to avail the services of the plaintiff, then the defendant could take back the said car within 2 days from the date of intimation of estimate, failing which the defendant would be liable to pay Rs.500/- per day as parking charges to the plaintiff. The defendant agreed to this. 4. The plaintiff conducted inspection and scrutiny of the said car and submitted to the defendant the itemized estimate no.1234 dated 16.4.2007 for repairing and servicing of the said car and called upon the defendant to make advance 50% payment within 2 days before proceeding to start the repairing work, otherwise parking charges as applicable would be charged from 15th April 2007. Despite receipt of the estimate bill, the defendant neither made advance payment as per the estimate nor made payment of Rs.2,500/- towards costs for inspection and providing estimate nor responded to the quotation/estimate of the plaintiff. The plaintiff therefore by its letter dated 9.5.2007 recorded the said facts and called upon the defendant to comply with the terms as agreed by the defendant by signing on the reverse of the said estimate bill. Despite receipt of letter dated 9th May 2007 the defendant did not bother to take delivery of the said car. The fact of non payment of charges by the defendant was further recorded by the plaintiff in its letter sent to the defendant dated 14.5.2007, 28.5.2007, 13.6.2007, 20.6.2007, 2.9.2007 and 27.9.2007 etc.. The defendant failed to respond to the said letters. The plaintiff finally by its advocate's notice dated 3rd April 2008 called upon the defendant to make the payment of Rs.10,500/- due from 15th April 2007 to 25th March 2008 with interest @ 18% p.a. being the amount of parking charges, cost for the estimate, inspection charges etc.. The packet containing the said notice sent to the defendant by RPAD was returned back with remark "intimation posted on 5.4.2008". 5. It is submitted on behalf of the plaintiff that the said car is lying with the plaintiff since the last more than three and a half years. During this period the condition of the car has totally deteriorated and the said car 3 would today fetch only scrap value. The said car is today occupying much required space of the plaintiff and needs to be disposed of at the earliest. 6. In my view, the plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought for by them, since the defendant has not bothered to take delivery of the said car since the last three and a half years and has also failed to respond to the numerous repeated letters addressed to him by the plaintiff requesting/calling upon her to take away the said car upon payment of the plaintiff's dues. It appears that the defendant is not taking possession of the said car since the amount payable to the plaintiff may be more than the value of the said car. In view thereof, I pass following order :- a) The Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay is appointed as Receiver of the said car being Maruti Wagon bearing Registration Number MH-31- CM-4777; b) The Receiver after obtaining valuation of the said vehicle shall sell the same by private treaty to the highest offerer; c) After disposal of the said car, the Court Receiver shall after deducting his costs, charges and expenses hand over the amount received to the plaintiff, which amount the plaintiff will credit against the dues payable to them by the defendant; d) The Notice of Motion is disposed of accordingly. (S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.)