: 1 : nms-1354-11=.sxw USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1354 OF 2011 IN SUIT NO. 1186 OF 1979 Hemant Harish Thakkar & Ors. .. Plaintiffs v/s. Balkrishna Appayya Shetty .. Defendant ......... Mr. Shailesh Shah i/b Ms. Shubhangi Abhyankar for the plaintiffs Mr. B.S. Nayak for the defendant in support of NMS ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J DATE : 22nd AUGUST, 2011. P.C. : 1. By this motion, the defendant wants that rebidding should be done and the higher bidder should be appointed. Learned advocate for the defendant contended that the plaintiffs have violated the terms of Agency Agreement entered into with the Receiver. These averments are not found in the affidavit in support of the motion. According to Mr. Nayak, learned : 2 : nms-1354-11=.sxw Counsel for the defendant, the allegations as regards non- compliance of agreement with the Receiver are mentioned in the affidavit in rejoinder. 2. I have perused the affidavit of rejoinder. In paragraph no. 6, no doubt, there is an averment that the plaintiffs have committed breaches of the agency agreement and there is a delay in payment of Royalty. However, the said paragraph does not give detail particulars. In the absence of detail particulars, the plaintiffs will not be able to reply to whatever is being stated against them. 3. In my view, as of today, no case is made out for grant of prayer clause (a). This motion is required to be dismissed. If at all, the defendant is of the view that he is entitled for certain reliefs on account of alleged violation of the terms and conditions of the Agency Agreement and default in payment, the defendant is free to take out the fresh notice of motion, which shall be considered on its own merits. So far as this motion is : 3 : nms-1354-11=.sxw concerned, defendant to pay to plaintiffs costs of Rs.3,000/- Cost to be paid as and by way of condition precedent for future motion, which may be taken out by the defendants. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)