1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 317 OF 2006 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.338 OF 2005 IN SUIT NO.1471 OF 1996 ... Mrs.Rekha J.Budhrani & Ors. ..Appellants v/s. Mrs.Vineeta Dadlani nee Ms.Bhagwanti Jethmal & ors. ..Respondents ... Mr.Ketan Chotane for the Appellant. None for the Respondents. ... CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & V.R.KINGAONKAR,JJ DATED: 13th April, 2010 P.C.: 1. By this appeal the Appellants who are original Defendants Nos.1, 2 & 3 are 2 challenging the order dated 3rd March, 2006 passed in Notice of Motion No.338 of 2005 by the learned single Judge. By that order the learned single Judge has directed the Court Receiver to sell Shop No.501, Dalamal House, Nariman Point, Mumbai, which is the office premises. The principal reason why the learned single Judge has directed the sale of the property is that, despite attempt made to appoint an agent, on royalty, to be in possession of the premises, nobody has come forward to be appointed as agent of the Receiver. In the meantime, nobody is paying outgoings of the property, which go on mounting. It appears from the order that in March, 2000 the arrears of the society s charges were about Rs.26,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty six lakh only). It appears that by order dated 24th July, 2009 the Division Bench of this Court discharged the Receiver who was 3 appointed as Receiver of the above referred premises. This creates a problem in implementing the impugned order, because the impugned order contemplates the Receiver to conduct the sale. Now by the Division Bench the Receiver is discharged. The question is who will conduct the sale. One more aspect, in our opinion, that has to be looked into is though the learned single Judge has directed the Receiver to sell the property, for conducting the sale the Receiver will have to get the property valued. He will have to issue an advertisement in the newspaper. That will require funds. There is no order made by the learned single Judge for putting the Receiver into funds for the purpose of conducting the sale. We also cannot make this order in the appeal, because except for the Appellants other parties are not appearing in Appeal. 4 2. Taking overall view of the matter, therefore, in our opinion, following order would meet the ends of justice. O R D E R The order impugned in the Appeal is set aside. Notice of Motion No.338 of 2005 is remitted back to the learned single Judge for denovo consideration and decision in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made above. Appeal disposed of. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (V.R.KINGAONKAR, J.)