spb/- 1 ca997-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 997 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2111 OF 2006 Vinayak Narhar Joshi, since deceased through his L.Rs.: 1. Shripad Vinayak Joshi & Ors. ... Applicants/ Petitioners. Vs. M/s. Pore Brothers & Anr. ... Respondents. ­­­ Mr.P.R.Arjunwadkar for the Applicants/Petitioners. Mr. S.R. Ganbavale for Respondent No.1. ­­­­­ CORAM : D. G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 15th FEBRUARY, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2 The applicant was a landlord. The suit for possession was dismissed. Writ petition against the order of dismissal is admitted by this court. 3 It is the case of the petitioner that during the pendency of the petition, the respondent­tenant has transferred the premises to some other persons and therefore, the petitioner has prayed for appointment of a receiver. Respondent has denied that there is any transfer. It is his spb/- 2 ca997-10.sxw contention that it is a business premises and only partnership is re­ instituted and that it does not amount to transfer. Be that as it may, admittedly a decree for possession has been refused by the appellate court. As such the applicant has no present right of possession and removal of the respondent from possession of the property which is a condition precedent for appointment of a court receiver under Order 40 Rule 1 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. 4 In the circumstances, the application is dismissed. [D.G. KARNIK, J.]