: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.479 OF 2006 IN EXECUTION APPLICATION NO.197 OF 2004 IN ARBITRATION CASE NO.2 OF 2001 The National Small Inds.Corpn.Ltd. ....Claimants V/s. M/s.Kamal Traders & Ors. ....Respondents And Kamla Y. Badlani ....Applicant Mr.R.J. Singh i/b R.J. Singh & Co. for the Claimants. Mr.Birendra Saraf i/b ALMT Legal for the Applicant. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 4TH FEBRUARY, 2008. P.C. : 1. The Chamber Summons is filed for setting aside the warrant of attachment dated 16.7.2004 by which a flat has been attached. I have proceeded on the basis that the Applicant is the mother of Respondent No.6 who is one of the judgment debtors. 2. Firstly, the claimant has not produced any proof as to the ownership of the said flat. There is no evidence produced by the Plaintiff to indicate that Respondent No.6 is the owner of the flat. It was : 2 : stated that Respondent No.6 led the claimant to belief that the flat belongs to him. There is no evidence to suggest on what basis the statement is made either. 3. Mr.Saraf the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicants has relied on the agreement for sale of the flat dated 9.9.1980 in favour of the Applicant. The agreement was registered by a deed of confirmation in 1981. The award was passed on 11.3.2002. The Applicant has relied upon the bills and receipts issued by the society, samples whereof are annexed to the affidavit filed by the Applicant. 4. Faced with this, it was contended that the flat may have been transferred to the name of the Applicant after the arbitration proceedings commenced with a view to defraud the claimant. If that is so, the claimant ought to have had the records of the society produced by adopting appropriate proceedings. This would have been the simplest exercise which ought to have been undertaken. The same has admittedly not been done. 5. In the circumstances, while there is evidence to establish the Applicant’s ownership of the flat, there is no evidence whatsoever produced by the : 3 : claimant indicating that the flat belongs to Respondent No.6 or that the flat has been fraudulently transferred by Respondent No.6 to the Applicant. 6. In the circumstances, the Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer (a). The claimant is always at liberty to take out a fresh execution application including in respect of the flat, if it is otherwise entitled to in law. . It is necessary that if any such application is made the claimant follows the procedure as stipulated in the order and judgment of this Court in the case of Ms.Aarti S. Bajaj v. Deepak Nichani & Smt.Shantibai Lalchand Nichani, in Chamber Summons No.241 of 2002 in Execution Application 26 of 2002 in Summary Suit No.1249 of 1999 dated 25.6.2002. 7. The order is stayed for a period of four weeks from today to enable the claimant to challenge the same.