1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COURT RECEIVER'S REPORT NO.112 of 2008 IN SUIT NO . 4905 of 1995 Alongwith Suit No. 2903 of 1996 Smt. Kalavatiben R. kapadia ...Plaintiffs V/s. Rameshbhai R. kapadia & Ors. ...Defendants Vishal Kannade with Sushant Chavan for defendant no.3 i/b. Shiralkar & Co. Mr. Satish Shetye with Mr. Nikhil Rajani i/b. Ms. V.Deshpande & Co. for defendant no.9 Mrs. U.S.Srivastava , 2 nd Asstt. to Court Receiver. AND SUIT NO. 2903 of 1996 Ulka Manu Kapadia & ors. ...Plaintiffs V/s. Harish Ramniklal kapadia & Ors. ...Defendants Vishal Kannade with Sushant Chavan for plaintiff i/b. Shiralkar & Co. CORAM:- SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J 24TH JULY, 2008 2 P.C. Notice has been issued by the BMC dated 23 rd August, 2007 relating to the repairs which are required in the suit building. Repairs cannot be carried out since the plaintiffs have not put the Receiver in funds. 2. The plaintiff in Suit No. 4905/1995 is absent. The Court Receiver has been appointed at the instance of the plaintiff. The Plaintiffs in Suit No. 2903/1996 claim 1/9 th share in the property. These plaintiffs accept only 1/9 th of cost of repair to be borne by them. The plaintiffs have got the Court Receiver appointed. The plaintiffs cannot have the entire building repaired by the Court Receiver without paying the repair cost. 3. The Court Receiver requires the repairs to be carried out in the suit property to be valued. The plaintiff has not offered to pay valuation charges. The Advocate for the plaintiff cannot even make a statement that the plaintiff shall pay valuation charges. Under these circumstances, the Court Receiver cannot take any further steps to value the extent of the repairs required to be carried out. As and when the plaintiffs in both the suits desire to obtain the valuation and put the Receiver in funds, the Receiver shall take steps 3 to obtain the valuation of the repairs. 4. In the alternative, the plaintiffs in both the Suits shall identify the repairs, if any, required to be undertaken and put the Receiver in funds after which the Receiver shall take steps for repair of the suit building. 5. The plaintiffs, who have got the Court Receiver appointed would otherwise be responsible for the damage or destruction to the building for want of repairs in view of the BMC's notice dated 23- 8-2007. However, the plaintiff's Advocate contends that Defendant No. 1 is in possession of a part of the building and in management of the suit property. The plaintiffs shall be entitled to take out any proceedings against the defendants in respect of the repairs to the suit building. 6. There are certain tenants and occupiers. The parties shall be entitled to adopt proceedings against them in law which the Court Receiver shall permit. 7. Prayer(c) of the Court Receiver's report does not survive in view of the dispute with regard to the surrender of the premises of Yenna Lodge in Mahabaleshwar. Parties shall be entitled to take out appropriate proceedings to 4 agitate their dispute with regard to that property. 8. Court Receiver's report stands disposed off accordingly. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J)