1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7902 OF 2007 -------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court’s or Judge’s Coram, appearances, Court’s orders orders or directions and Registrar’s orders -------------------------------------------------------------- None for the petitioner. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR, J. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR, J. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR, J. DATED : 18th February, 2008 DATED : 18th February, 2008 DATED : 18th February, 2008 P.C. : 1. None for the petitioner. Even on the last occasion, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. 2. This petition is filed to challenge order passed by the learned District Judge on 3-8-2007 in Misc. Civil Appeal No.51 of 2007 and 52 of 2007, whereby the Trial Court is directed to consider the appointment of Court Receiver in respect of the disputed property. 3. In this case, both the petitioner and respondent No.1 had filed independent suits claiming ownership of the suit property. The trial Court on the basis of Commissioner’s report held that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case and accordingly restrained the respondents from disturbing the 2 possession of the petitioner over the suit property till the disposal of the suit. 4. On appeal filed by the respondent, the learned District Judge, by the impugned order directed the Trial Court to consider the appointment of Court Receiver in relation to the disputed suit property on its own merits on such terms as it deems fit and proper and that such application be decided on merits latest by 10-9-2007. The learned District Judge further directed that the parties should maintain status-quo in the meantime. 5. Since the learned District Judge has merely directed the Trial Court to consider the application of the respondent No.1 for appointment of Court Receiver without expressing any opinion on merits, it cannot be said that the said order suffers from any infirmity. In this view of the matter, even on merits I do not see any substance in this writ petition and accordingly the writ petition is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. 3 J.P. DEVADHAR, J.