rng IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2597 OF 2005 OF MOTION NO. 2597 OF 2005 OF MOTION NO. 2597 OF 2005 in in in SUIT SUIT SUIT NO.1365 OF 2000 NO.1365 OF 2000 NO.1365 OF 2000 Jayesh P.Bhagalia ... Plaintiff Vs. Umesh P.Bhagalia & ors ... Defendants Mr.H.D’Souza for Plaintiff Ms.Renuka Lele i.b Ms.E.Gonsalves for Applicant CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.V.NIRGUDE, J : A.V.NIRGUDE, J : A.V.NIRGUDE, J DATE DATE DATE : 22ND AUGUST, 2008 : 22ND AUGUST, 2008 : 22ND AUGUST, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The present Notice of Motion,it seems,is an incorrect proceeding taken out by the plaintiff for enforcing the order passed in his favour in Notice of Motion No.119/2000. It is clear from the record that the plaintiff’s Notice of Motion No.119/2000 was allowed in terms of prayers (a) and (b). Prayer (b) directed the defendant no. 1 to pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs.8000/-p.m. for user of certain suit premises. For some time this order was stayed due to the order passed in the defendant’s Notice of Motion No.949/2001. But the defendant’s Notice of Motion was subsequently dismissed. In view of the dismissal of that Motion, order passed in favour of the plaintiff in 2 Notice of Motion No. 119/2000 revived and is now in force. Instead of taking out appropriate proceedings for recovery of the amount due pursuant to prayer (b) of Notice of Motion No.119/2000 the plaintiff took out the present Notice of Motion for recovery of the amount. Plaintiff should have filed an Execution proceeding in respect of the recovery of the amount and a Notice of motion is not required to be filed. So Notice of Motion stands dismissed. Plaintiff is given liberty to take out an Execution Application. { A.V.Nirgude, J } A.V.Nirgude, J } A.V.Nirgude, J }