: 1 : conp-25-10=.sxw USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 25 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO. 2176 OF 2007 Kashiprasad Gajadhar Ringshia .. Petitioner/ Plaintiff v/s. Sankar Bhau Patil & Ors. .. Respondents/ Defendants ......... Mr. R.P. Singh for the petitioner ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 15th OCTOBER, 2010 P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. The consent terms at page 47 came to be arrived at between the petitioner and defendant no.6. Under the said consent terms, defendant no.6 was to pay to plaintiff Rs.1,65,00,000/- as per the schedule mentioned in clause 4. It is the case of the petitioner that respondents contemnors that is defendant no.6 has not paid any amount except first installment of Rs. 25,00,000/-. According to him, respondent no.6 has, therefore, committed contempt. 2. I have perused the said consent terms dated NIL May, 2009. Clause 6 of the said consent terms clearly provide for appointment of : 2 : conp-25-10=.sxw Court Receiver and even Court Receiver is supposed to take steps to take possession, give possession to the plaintiff as agent of the Court Receiver, dispose of that property and arrange to pay the plaintiff monies as per the consent terms and excess monies are to be repaid to respondent no.6. Clause 7 of the consent terms is in the nature of an undertaking that respondent no.6 will not create third party rights in respect of the area etc. If this is the position, the consent terms are self-serving and if respondent no.6 had not complied with payment part of the consent terms, it was necessary for the petitioner to move the Court Receiver to take further action in terms of clause 6. It appears that as of today, Receiver is not moved. 3. In my view, looking to the nature of the consent terms, there is no question of respondent no.6 committing contempt as is suggested by the petitioner for mere non-payment of the monies. Hence, no prima- facie case is made out for having committed contempt. It will be open for the petitioner to approach the Receiver to protect his interest. In view of the above, petition cannot be admitted. Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)