1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION rpa COURT RECEIVER'S REPORT NO. 11 OF 2010 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 100 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 776 OF 2009 Ashyana (Andheri Pachim) SRA Chs. Ltd. .. Petitioner. v/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents. And Gulam Farid Qureshi & Ors. .. Contemnors .... Mr. S.G. Suvarna for the Petitioner. Mr. Milind More, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1 to 3. Mr. Davvrat Dhankar i/b. C. N. Gole for Respondent No.8. .... CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 29TH JANUARY 2010. P.C. On 29th July, 2009 Respondent Nos. 5,6 and 7 had undertaken to this Court that they will hand over the vacant possession of the present premises/tenaments occupied by them to the Respondent No. 8 on or before 25th September, 2009. However, Respondent Nos. 5,6 and 7 failed to handover the 2 possession as undertaken to this Court. 2. A Contempt Petition was thereafter filed by the Petitioner being C. P. No. 100 of 2009. In the said Contempt Petition by an order of this Court dated 19th December, 2009, once again, by consent, the following order was inter-alia passed : " On or before 28th December, 2009, Respondent Nos. 5,6 and 7 shall hand over vacant and peaceful possession of their premises to the 8th Respondent. In the event, Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 fail to do so, the Court Receiver shall take physical possession of the premises in the occupation of Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 and hand over the same to the 8th Respondent." 3. Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 once again failed to hand over the possession of the premises to the 8th Respondent on or before 28th December, 2009 thereby committing breach of the order dated 19th December, 2009. The Court Receiver thereafter sought to take physical possession from Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 of the respective tenamants after fixing an appointment on 7th January, 2010 at 11.00 a.m. However, Respondent Nos. 5, 6, and 7 refused to hand over the vacant possession of their respective tenamants to the Court Receiver on the ground that their children 3 are schooling and that they require big and spacious rooms for their family members. The Court Receiver has therefore submitted this report seeking the following directions : "(a) Whether, the Court Receiver should take forcible possession of the suit premises in the occupation of Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7, situated at Meer Husain Tangewala Chawl, behind Andheri Market, Andheri (W), Mumbai from the Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 or from any other persons found in possession, by breaking open lock/s with help of police." 4. The learned Advocate appearing for Respondent No. 8 has informed this Court that Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 had filed a Review Petition seeking review of the order passed by this Court dated 19th December, 2009 being Review Petition (Lodging) No.73 of 2010. The Review Petition was dismissed yesterday i.e. on 28th January, 2010. Though, the Court Receiver has forwarded a copy of his Report to Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 on 25th January, 2010 by courier, the Respondent Nos. 5,6 and 7 are not present. In any event, from the facts recorded herein above, it is established beyond any doubt that Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 have repeatedly committed willful breach of the undertakings/assurances given to this Court. Such conduct on the 4 part of the Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 cannot be tolerated. 5. In view thereof, prayer clause (a) of the Court Receiver's Report dated 18th December, 2010, is allowed. 6. The Report is disposed of. The Petitioner shall pay costs of the Report to the Court Receiver. [ S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. ]