: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.1411 OF 1995 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.6367 OF 1993 IN B.C.C.C. S.C. SUIT NO.266 OF 1984 Shankar Dhonu Desai ..Appellant. Vs. Leo Sequeira ..Respondent. Mr.N.K.Mudnaney for the Appellant. Mr.G.K.Karkera for Respondent Nos.1 to 8. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 23RD JUNE, 2008 DATED : 23RD JUNE, 2008 DATED : 23RD JUNE, 2008 P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : This is an Appeal against the order of the Mumbai City Civil Court, ordering the appointment of the Court Receiver in respect of the suit shop alongwith the stationery business, with a further direction to appoint the Appellant/Defendant as his agent on the usual terms and conditions with a condition that the Defendant would not be allowed to change the nature of the business any more. 2. The suit is filed by the original Respondent for possession of the suit premises alongwith the laundry business carried on therein and for compensation and/or mesne profits. : 2 : 3. The case of the original Appellant is that the premises was given on leave and licence in the year 1966 upto 1970. That by virtue of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 and with effect from 1.2.1973 he became a deemed tenant. The original Respondents had contended that on 30.6.1974 the parties had entered into a fresh agreement being a conducting agreement. The validity of this agreement is challenged by the Appellants. 4. Ultimately, the original Appellant on 24.2.1988 filed R.A.D. Suit No.4972 of 1975 for a declaration that he was a tenant in respect of the suit premises. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court. The Appellants however succeeded in Appeal No.253 of 1989. By an order dated 17.12.1992 the Appellate Court of the Small Causes Court set aside the judgment and decree dated 24.2.1988 and granted the declaration that the original Appellant is a tenant of the suit premises. 5. The original Respondent filed a Writ Petition No.2481 of 1993 challenging the order dated 17.12.1992. By an order dated 7.10.1993 passed by : 3 : this Court, the judgment and order dated 17.12.1992 was stayed. However, by a subsequent order dated 23.3.1992 passed in Writ Petition No.2481 of 1993, the order dated 7.10.1993 was modified and it was ordered that the decree granted by the Small Causes Court will be subject to the outcome of the Writ Petition. 6. The position as of today is that the declaration by the Appellate Court of the Small Causes Court by the judgment dated 17.12.1992 stands. In other words, as on date, the finding of tenancy in favour of the Appellant stands. In these circumstances, it would not be proper to appoint a Court Receiver in respect of the premises or for the building. However, the Writ Petition is pending before this Court and the suit is pending before the Mumbai City Civil Court. In these circumstances, it is also necessary to protect the interest of the Respondent pending these proceedings. 7. Thus, in the event of the Writ Petition being allowed and the order dated 17.12.1992 passed by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court being set aside, the impugned order should, in fairness, stand revived with the modification that the Court : 4 : Receiver will be appointed only for the premises and not for the stationery business. 8. In the circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and the following order is passed :- i) In the event Writ Petition No.2481 of 1993 being allowed, the impugned order will stand revieved without further orders of this Court. However, the Court Receiver shall be appointed only in respect of the premises but not of the business. ii) Further, pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, the Appellant shall not dispose of, alienate, encumber, part with possession of or create any third party right, title and/or interest in, to, upon or in respect of the suit premises and shall also not carry out any alterations/modifications thereon of any nature whatsoever, temporary or permanent. 9. Appeal from Order stands disposed of. : 5 : ***