1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION JUDGE’S ORDER NO.85 OF 2011 IN EXECUTION APPLICATION NO.597 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO.1580 OF 2004 Sukriti Maingi Applicant versus Indrani Chowdhary and others Respondents Mr.V.Joseph for applicant. CORAM : S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 31st March 2011 PC : 1. By judgment dated 24th June 2010 Suit No.1580 of 2004 was decreed in terms of prayer clause (a) of the suit whereunder the defendants were directed to hand over the possession of Flat No.18-A in Sparsh Co-operative Housing Society at Janakalyan Nagar, Marve Road, Malad (West), Mumbai-400 095, to the plaintiff. The defendants preferred an appeal therefrom. The Appeal Court vide its order dated 12th October 2010 stayed the decision of the learned Single Judge dated 24th June 2010 subject to the conditions set out therein including the condition to deposit with the Registrar/Prothonotary & Senior Master an amount of Rs. 17,000/- p.m. as compensation. The Appeal Court further directed the respondents to deposit the arrears from the date of the decree till October 2010 with the Registrar/ Prothonotary & Senior Master within a period of six weeks from the date of order. Thereafter the defendants took out a Notice of Motion being No.3301 of 2010 seeking modification of the order passed by the Appeal Court dated 12th October 2010 which was dismissed on the ground that the said Notice of Motion does not merit any 2 interference. The defendants have breached the above conditions and have failed to deposit any amounts whatsoever as directed by the Appeal Court. 2. Since the attachment was already levied on the suit flat prior to the order of the Appeal Court dated 12th October 2010, the office of the Sheriff of Mumbai in execution of the decree sought to take possession of the suit premises. However, the suit premises were found locked. The persons residing in the neighbouring flats informed the representative from the office of the Sheriff of Mumbai that the respondents have left the premises since the last three months. 3. In view thereof, the present Judge's Order is taken out seeking directions/permission from this Court to take forcible possession of the suit premises including breaking open the lock and taking possession of the same, if required, with police assistance. 4. In view of the facts set out hereinabove, order in terms of the Judge's Order No.85 of 2011 is accordingly granted. (S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.)