1 IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL ORIGINAL ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL JURISDICTION JUDGE’S JUDGE’S JUDGE’S ORDER ORDER ORDER NO.443 OF 2006 NO.443 OF 2006 NO.443 OF 2006 IN IN IN SUIT SUIT SUIT NO.627 NO.627 NO.627 OF 1968 OF 1968 OF 1968 Shamima Shamima Shamima T.Bootwala & ors T.Bootwala & ors T.Bootwala & ors ...... Plaintiffs Plaintiffs Plaintiffs vs vs vs Salmaq Salmaq Salmaq Mehboobali Rajan .. Mehboobali Rajan .. Mehboobali Rajan .. Defendant Defendant Defendant & Falak Falak Falak Lamak Lamak Lamak Fazlelali & anr. Respondents Fazlelali & anr. Respondents Fazlelali & anr. Respondents Mr.Nikhil Mr.Nikhil Mr.Nikhil Dharod Dharod Dharod i/b Pravin Mehta & Co for Plfss i/b Pravin Mehta & Co for Plfss i/b Pravin Mehta & Co for Plfss CORAM CORAM CORAM :SMT R.S.DALVI, J :SMT R.S.DALVI, J :SMT R.S.DALVI, J DATE DATE DATE : 6th February, 2007 : 6th February, 2007 : 6th February, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1.1.1. It is the case of the plaintiffs that by It is the case of the plaintiffs that by It is the case of the plaintiffs that by consent consent consent of all the parties, the plaintitfs are of all the parties, the plaintitfs are of all the parties, the plaintitfs are allowed allowed allowed to withdraw Rs.2,00,000/- from the suit to withdraw Rs.2,00,000/- from the suit to withdraw Rs.2,00,000/- from the suit a/c. a/c. a/c. 2.2.2. The plaintiffs had taken out a Judge’s order on The plaintiffs had taken out a Judge’s order on The plaintiffs had taken out a Judge’s order on 2nd 2nd 2nd October, 2005 also. The plaintiff’s advocate October, 2005 also. The plaintiff’s advocate October, 2005 also. The plaintiff’s advocate states states states that that that such Judge’s orders have been taken out such Judge’s orders have been taken out such Judge’s orders have been taken out every every every year. The respondents’ consent to such a year. The respondents’ consent to such a year. The respondents’ consent to such a withdrawal. withdrawal. withdrawal. They have consented earlier. They They have consented earlier. They They have consented earlier. They have have have also also also brought consent letter of the respondents brought consent letter of the respondents brought consent letter of the respondents for for for withdrawal at present. The consent letter is withdrawal at present. The consent letter is withdrawal at present. The consent letter is stated stated stated to be notarised in Colombo, Sri Lanka. It to be notarised in Colombo, Sri Lanka. It to be notarised in Colombo, Sri Lanka. It 2 isisis seen that each year the plaintiffs have been seen that each year the plaintiffs have been seen that each year the plaintiffs have been allowed allowed allowed to withdraw Rs.2,00,000/-. It is also seen to withdraw Rs.2,00,000/-. It is also seen to withdraw Rs.2,00,000/-. It is also seen that that that the respondents who are in Sri Lanka have the respondents who are in Sri Lanka have the respondents who are in Sri Lanka have consented consented consented to such a withdrawal from time to time. to such a withdrawal from time to time. to such a withdrawal from time to time. ItItIt is is is therefore, directed that Court Receiver shall therefore, directed that Court Receiver shall therefore, directed that Court Receiver shall allow allow allow the plaintiffs to withdraw Rs.2,00,000/- each the plaintiffs to withdraw Rs.2,00,000/- each the plaintiffs to withdraw Rs.2,00,000/- each year year year as and when it falls due pending the suit. as and when it falls due pending the suit. as and when it falls due pending the suit. 3.3.3. Judge’s order disposed of accordingly. No Judge’s order disposed of accordingly. No Judge’s order disposed of accordingly. No further further further Judge’s order need be taken out. Judge’s order need be taken out. Judge’s order need be taken out. (Smt (Smt (Smt R.S.Dalvi,J) R.S.Dalvi,J) R.S.Dalvi,J)