IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION JUDGE’S ORDER No.243 OF 2009 IN EXECUTION APPLICATION NO.138 OF 2009 Ms. Shobha M. Kapadia ..Claimant Vs. Mr. Mahendra V. Kapadia ..Respondent Ms. R.C.Nichani for the Claimant Mr. Mahendra V. Kapadia Respondent present in person CORAM: DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. DATE: 10th September , 2009 P.C. : 1. A Judge’s Order has been taken out for a direction to the Sheriff to execute a Writ of Possession dated 21st March 2009, by taking possession of a godown situate at 23/25 Shri Mahalaxmi Clearing Agency at 2nd Fanaswadi Dadiseth Agiary Lane, Mumbai 400 002. Under the terms of the Consent Award dated 4th April 2007, the Claimant is entitled to the possession of the godown, while the Respondent is entitled to the possession of a shop. The Plaintiff has deposited an amount of Rs.14.5 lacs which is due and payable, to the Respondent with the Prothonotary and Senior Master. On 6th April 2009, the Bailiff went to take possession. The Respondent assured the Bailiff that, he would hand over possession within 20 days. The possession has not been handed over though five months have elapsed. In an Affidavit filed by the Respondent in reply, he has sought (i) two months time to vacate the godown; (ii) a direction that the Claimant may withdraw the amount deposited with Prothonotary and pay it over to the Respondent directly; (iii) a direction that the Respondent may pay an amount of Rs. 1000/- towards costs imposed by the Bombay City Civil Court in certain Contempt proceedings and (iv) a direction that the Claimant may take possession from the Manager of the godown. 2. In view of the fact, that the Respondent had agreed on 6th April 2009 to vacate the godown within 20 days, no further time can be granted. In so far as monies deposited are concerned, the Claimant had made a deposit with the Prothonotary and Senior Master on 27th February 2009. The Respondent would be at liberty to withdraw the amount. The claimant cannot be directed to take possession from the Manager or clerk of Respondent, since they are only agents of the Respondent. The Respondent is duty bound by the Consent Award. For the aforesaid reasons, there shall be an order in terms of the Judge’s Order separately signed. (Dr. D.Y.Chandrachud, J)