SM 1 3.ao.570.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 570 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 793 OF 2011 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 570 OF 2011 Sheetalkumar Navalmal Sanghvi ....Appellant. Versus Sushilkumar Navalmal Sanghvi and others ....Respondents. ____________ Mr. Ragul L. Nevlekar for the Appellant. Mr. Vaibhav Patankar for the Respondent No. 1. CORAM: R. M. BORDE, J. DATED : OCTOBER 19, 2011. P.C.: The appellant is raising exception to the interim order passed by the Trial Court below Exhibit-5 in S. C. Suit No. 897 of 2010. The Trial Court rejected an application tendered by the appellant/original plaintiff seeking appointment of Court Receiver, for taking possession of the premises and for rendering accounts. The Trial Judge has considered all relevant aspects in the matter and recorded finding that it is not a case wherein the defendant is in any manner trying to cause loss / damage to the property and therefore, no case is made out for appointment of Court Receiver. 2. The Counsel appearing for the respondent/ original defendants, on instructions, states that the respondents do not intend to create third party interest in relation to the property in dispute. The statement made is accepted. I do not deem it necessary to cause interference in the instant Appeal from Order. SM 2 3.ao.570.11 3. The Appeal from Order is devoid of substance. Hence, stands dismissed. In view of disposal of the Appeal from Order, the Civil Application does not survive and stands disposed of. (R. M. BORDE, J.)