1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.920 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.1161 OF 1989 Essel Infraprojects Ltd. ...Plaintiff. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. ..Defendants. Mr. Kotwal, Sr.Counsel along with mr. Prakash Shah with Mr.Sumit Ragani i/by PDS Legal for the plaintiff. Mr. P.G.Lad for the Defendant No.1. Mr. Uam Vyavakvkar i/by M/s. Khaitan &Jaykar for the Defendant Nos. 3, 9, 10 and 11 . Mr.A.J.Almeda, for the Applicants/Proposed defendants in Chamber Summons No.1642/2009 CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 15th June, 2010 PC : 1 Heard both sides. 2 This chamber summons is taken out by the original plaintiff. Prayers in the chamber summons are for directions to the Court Receiver to permit the plaintiff to carry out the survey of the suit land through the DILR. The second prayer is in respect of fencing of the property. In so far as first prayer is concerned, there can be no objection from any party for carrying out survey. It is therefore, directed that on the plaintiff depositing of Rs.1.00 2 lac towards the costs of the survey, the Court Receiver to make an application to the DILR for survey of the property. After effecting the survey, the DILR to darmarcate the suit land. Any additional costs required in this regard will be payable by the plaintiff. It is made clear that payment of amount by the plaintiff will not entitled the plaintiff to claim any equity. If any amount is left with the Court Receiver, out of the amount of Rs.1.00 lac, on the completion of the survey, the same will be refunded back to the plaintiff. 3 In so far as prayer clause (b) is concerned, there is a serious dispute about the title of the land. This court has taken a view in Writ Petition No.1202/2001 filed by the third party that the right of the land was given up by the predecessor in title of the plaintiff. The present plaintiff has filed SLP before the Apex Court and the dispute is pending before the Apex Court. In my view, prayer clause (b) cannot be granted at this stage hence, it is rejected with liberty to apply afresh for the same relief if the SLP is allowed by the Apex Court. Chamber summons is disposed off in the aforesaid terms. (R.S. MOHITE, J.)