1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2697 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO. 1926 OF 2009 Noorjahan Salim Basha. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Sanjay Kumar Mishtra & Ors. ... Defendants. Mr. Shailendra Naidu a/w. Mustafa Kachwala for the Plaintiff. Mr. Shakuntala Joshi for Defendant 2. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 20TH AUGUST 2009. P.C. :- In the light of the order passed by this Court and more particularly the observations in paragraph 13 therein, there does not appear to be any apprehension that the interest of both sides would not be protected. While the Plaintiff has instituted the Suit and it is pending, there is no question of the Court concluding the rights of either parties. However, when this Court has, in earlier proceedings, granted liberty to the Defendants to proceed and dispose off the machine and when the sale proceeds are not to be disbursed, I do not see any reason to grant any interim orders save and except clarifying that after the sale by public auction/private treaty is 2 concluded by the Receiver and he deposits the sale proceeds in pursuance of the earlier orders with the Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court, the Plaintiff herein would be at liberty to apply for appropriate reliefs including pressing for prayers in the present Notice of Motion. All contentions at that stage are kept open. The Notice of Motion is disposed off. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)