FAO(OS)152/2010 Page 1 of 6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) No.152/08 & CM Nos.4705-07/08, 12174/10 CNA EXPORTS PVT. LTD. …..Appellant through Mr. Abhinav Vashisht with Mr. Suresh Singh & Mr.Raman Kapur, Advs. versus MRS. JASKIRAT DATWANI …..Respondent through Mr.Sidharth Bawa with Ms. Simar K. Narula, Advs. for Respondent No.1 Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. for Respondent Nos.2 & 3 Mr.Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jeevesh Nagrath, Adv. for Mrs. Nitya Bharaney % Date of Hearing : July 15, 2010 Date of Decision : July 26, 2010 CORAM: * HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAMAJIT SEN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? No 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No 3. Whether the Judgment should be reported in the Digest? No VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J. 1. This Appeal assails the Order of the learned Single Judge dated 1.2.2008, dismissing the application filed by Mr.Anand Datwani in his capacity as a Director of Defendant No.3, In Exports Private Limited, which admittedly holds thirty eight per FAO(OS)152/2010 Page 2 of 6 cent share in immovable property bearing No.6, Friends Colony (West), New Delhi. The Prayer in the application is for handing over possession of the portion shaded in Green in the Site Plan produced below:- SITE MAP 2. The portion, shaded in blue, is in the possession of Mr. Janak Datwani, because of his holding over ninety nine per cent shares of In Exports Private Limited; this portion is twenty four per cent of the Suit Property. FAO(OS)152/2010 Page 3 of 6 3. The remaining portion, shaded in pink, comprising thirty eight per cent is in the possession of Mrs. Jaskirat Datwani, ex- wife of Mr. Janak Datwani. A bare perusal of the sketch map manifests that unless Mr. Janak Datwani has access and control over the Green portion, he will be fully hemmed in by the Green and pink portion. Prima facie, it appears to us that Mr. Janak Datwani would not have agreed on the present settlement with his ex-wife unless he had, at the relevant time, dominion over the Green portion. All the parties hereto admit that the Green portion falls to the share of the Appellant Company. It has been urged on behalf of the Appellant that handing over of possession thereof was thwarted by Mrs. Jamna Datwani, mother of Mr.Janak Datwani, on the premise that she was, at the material time, the Managing Director of the Appellant Company and hence ought not to be dispossessed therefrom. 4. It is also uncontroverted that three Suits, bearing Nos.113/2005, 118/2007 and 556/2008, are pending between the parties. 5. The dispute, succinctly stated, relates to the shareholding of the Appellant Company. Learned counsel for the Applicant has not convinced us, and there is no clear evidence in this regard, that his client, Mr. Anand Datwani, has the majority shareholding. What is evident to us is that the shareholding is FAO(OS)152/2010 Page 4 of 6 fragmented and is held, inter alia, by various members of the Datwani family. 6. A Local Commissioner had earlier been appointed and under her supervision a one brick demarcation had been erected/placed on the suit property. 7. Learned counsel for Respondent No.2/In Export Private Limited and Respondent No.3 has answered affirmatively to our suggestion that awaiting any decision with regard to the ownership and control of the Appellant Company, a Receiver may be appointed in respect of the Green portion. This appears to us to be a just and expedient solution since, avowedly, it is the Appellant Company which is entitled to ownership and enjoyment of the Green portion. We have already observed that Mr. Anand Datwani has failed in establishing, even prima facie, that he is the majority shareholder of Respondent No.2. It is his grievance that because his mother, Mrs. Jamna Datwani, had sided with his brother, Mr. Janak Datwani, the Applicants’ efforts to take possession of the Green portion on behalf of the Appellant Company had been defeated and rendered futile. Presently, it transpires that their mother, Mrs. Jamna Datwani, is siding with the Appellant, but keeping the circumstances in view, we think that this may well be a transient phase. In any event, even if the shareholding of Mrs. Jamna Datwani is added FAO(OS)152/2010 Page 5 of 6 to that of Mr. Anand Datwani, they would not have become majority shareholders in the Appellant Company. In this state of flak, we think it imperative that a Receiver should be appointed in respect of the Green portion. 8. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 has denied that Mrs. Jamna Datwani was ever denied access to the room in her occupation. He confirms that she is free to occupy it whenever she chooses provided she resumes residing there herself. The said room is enclosed in black border in the Site Map. It is clarified that Mrs. Jamuna Datwani may come to reside in the said room herself. This liberty is extended exclusively to her. 9. We accordingly appoint Ms. Sonia Singh, Advocate, A-14, Nizamuddin(East), New Delhi – 110 013, Phone No.46502980 as the Receiver with instruction to take possession of the Green portion as shown in the sketch map. If the demarcation is subsisting and clear, no further action in that regard needs to be taken. We do not think it necessary to construct a higher wall or brick structure since that would impede enjoyment of easementary rights of the occupants/owners of the blue portion. However, none of the parties shall be entitled to use the Green portion without the leave of this Court. The Receiver shall protect the Court’s possession of the Green portion. He shall be FAO(OS)152/2010 Page 6 of 6 entitled to unimpeded ingress and egress to the Green portion. The Receiver shall file a bi-annual Report to this Court in this context. The Receiver shall be paid a monthly fee of `2,000/- per month, to be borne by both the Applicant and Respondent Nos.2 and 3, which shall be borne equally by Mr. Anand Datwani and Mr.Janak Datwani and shall be paid before the seventh day of each calendar month. This arrangement shall continue till orders to the contrary in CS(OS) No.698/2003. 10. Appeal and all pending applications stands disposed of in these terms. ( VIKRAMAJIT SEN ) JUDGE ( MUKTA GUPTA ) JUDGE July 26, 2010 tp