/ 1 / IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1933 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 1789 OF 1999 Indbank Merchant Banking Services Ltd. ...Plaintiffs Vs. Viral Syntex Ltd. and Anr. ...Defendants --- Mr.Kirit Modi i/b M/s. JMB Partners for Plaintiffs None for the Defendants. Mr.K.D. Rane, S.O. from Court Receiver present. ---- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED JULY 14, 2008 P.C. Heard the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Plaintiffs. None appears on behalf of the Defendants, though they have served. By order dated 7th July, 2008, this Court had directed the Plaintiffs to give advocate's notice. No Advocate appeared on behalf of the Defendants. Accordingly, notice has been given by the Plaintiffs. In spite of service, none appears on behalf of the Defendants. In the order dated 7th July, 2008, it was made clear that if the Defendants or the Counsel for the Defendants do not appear on the next date, the Motion shall be finally disposed of. / 2 / In this motion the Plaintiffs are seeking following relief: “(a) that the Hon'ble Court do permit the Plaintiffs to sell the said Equipment which is in the possession of the court Receiver, directly from the factory premises of the 1st Defendant, by private sale or public auction as the Plaintiffs may deem fit, upon which the Court Receiver do stand discharged without passing accounts”. The Plaintiffs had given machinery to the Defendants on lease. The Plaintiffs, however, after taking possession of the machinery did not pay the installments, which were due and payable as per agreement dated 25th March, 1999. Even though Defendants were appointed as agent of the Court Receiver, and were directed to execute the agency agreement, he has not executed any agency agreement. Thereafter the Plaintiffs filed another Notice of Motion for modification of the order dated 27th February, 2005. Accordingly, the order was modified and the Court Receiver was directed to take symbolic possession of the equipments. Thereafter, by a subsequent order dated 15th October, 2001, the Court Receiver was directed to take symbolic possession. In the meantime, the premises owned by the / 3 / Defendants, the possession was taken over by the Indbank. It is, therefore, submitted that since the Defendants have not complied with the order passed by this Court, the Plaintiffs shall be permitted to sell the equipments. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and since none-appears on behalf of the Defendants, though they have been served, the following order will meet the ends of justice. “The Plaintiff is permitted to sell the machinery, which is in the possession of the Receiver and the said machinery will be sold in public auction. Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) and is accordingly disposed of.” V.M. KANADE J. / 4 /