IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.90 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.3303 OF 1992 Rameshchandra K. Raote ..... Plaintiff V/s. Datta A Raote & ors. .... Defendants And M/s.Abhay Gems .... Respondent Ms.P.L.Bachani, for the plaintiff Mr.Y.R.Shah, for the applicant. Mr.J.M.Chondankar, for defendant No.5. CORAM: R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED: 19th JANUARY, 2009. P.C. 1. Heard all the learned Advocates appearing before the Court including Mr.Y.R.Shah, for the applicant-respondent. By this chamber summons, the respondent wants that the Court Receiver should open the suit premises which are presently under his lock and key and handover the possession to the respondent M/s.Abhay Gems. 2. In the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the respondent could not point out that the arrears of royalty paid by the respondent in accordance with the terms set out in order dated 27-09- 2007. 2 This goes to show that the respondent has not complied with the order dated 27-09-2007 in terms of the time sense. The clause 4 of the order dated 27-09-2007 shows that if respondents were to commit default, the Court Receiver was to take forcible possession. It is seen that the Court Receiver has acted in terms of Clause 4. No specific grievance was put forth by the learned counsel for the respondent that the Court Receiver has acted in an illegal and arbitrary manner. If this is so, regaining of the possession of the Court Receiver cannot be treated as illegal. Hence, as of today, the Court Receiver cannot be directed to open the lock and put the respondent in possession of the suit premises. 3. It is seen that the respondent was appointed as agent of the Court Receiver. That agency has came to an end on account of the premises being taken over by the Court Receiver. In my view, this is change in the circumstance and therefore, an opportunity is required to be given to the plaintiff or anybody from the side of the defendants including the respondent to take out a proceedings for that party being appointed as agent of the Court Receiver. In view of this, anybody who is interested in getting appointed as agent of the Court Receiver including the respondent is at liberty to file fresh chamber summons for being appointed as agent of the Court Receiver. The said chamber summons shall be heard 3 on merits. With these observations, the present chamber summons is required to be dismissed. In the peculiar facts, I am not inclined to saddle the respondent with the costs of this chamber summons. Hence, the order. : O R D E R : 1. The chamber summons is dismissed with no order as to costs. ( R.Y.GANOO, J. )