1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.362 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.1336 OF 1988 Dr.Arun Prabhu .. Plaintiff Versus M/s.Rizvi Builders and Ors. .. Defendants Mr.K.Shroff i/b. Dhruve & Co. for plaintiff Mr.Kawli i/b.M.J.Shetty for defendant No.1 Mr.M.Rathod i/b. A.A.S.Shaikh for defendant Nos.2 and 3. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 3rd February 2009. P.C. 2 . Heard parties. Perused the motion and the affidavits filed in support and reply. This is a suit of 1988 and is set down for recording evidence. In fact, the plaintiffs have completed the examination in chief and the request of the defendant are cross examination of plaintiffs has been allowed and the witness is under cross examination. Further, the defendants have also sought leave to lead evidence. 2. Considering that the suit itself being heard and more than 20 years have lapsed from the date of institution of the suit, no useful purpose will be served by appointing Court Receiver of the suit flat. Mr.Kawli appearing for defendant No.1 on instructions makes a statement that the flat is vacant and not allotted to anybody. It is neither sold or disposed of. No third party rights are created but the electricity bills are shown in the name of son of the builder (defendant No.1). However, 3 even he is not occupying the flat. 3. Statement of Mr.Kawli is accepted. Needless, therefore, to state that first defendant shall not induct anybody in suit flat until further orders. The plaintiff and his Advocate/ representative is at liberty to inspect the suit flat after prior appointment with the first defendant and his Advocate. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)