1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1480 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.2711 OF 2005 Smt.Mona Ashok Manial ..Plaintiff V/s. Mukesh Lalchand Talreja & anr. ..Defendants And The Court Receiver, High Court, ..Respondent Bombay Mr.J.S.Kini, Advocate, for the plaintiff Mr.G.D.Utangale i/b.Uttangale & Co., Advocate, for the applicant/defendant No.1 Mr.D.V.Deokar, 1st Assistant to Court Receiver CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATE : 12TH NOVEMBER, 2008 P.C. . By the above Chamber Summons, the applicant, who is the original defendant No.1 and who is in occupation of the flat in question as an agent of the Court Receiver questions the ad-hoc 2 royalty fixed by the Court Receiver as contained in the directions dated 28th July, 2008 and 15th September, 2008. It is the case of the applicant that the royalty fixed should not be more than Rs.3,000/- per month considering size of the flat and location of the building wherein it is situated. 2. The Court Receiver has fixed the ad-hoc royalty at Rs.8,000/- by an in house process taking into consideration the relevant factors. As indicated above, the applicant/defendant No.1 questions the said ad-hoc royalty fixed at Rs.8,000/- and contends that the flat of the said dimension and area would fetch lesser amount of compensation per month. 3. On behalf of the original plaintiff the learned advocate Mr.J.S.Kini draws the Court's attention to a letter addressed to his client by an agent stating that there is an offer of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for the said flat per month with Rs.2,00,000/- as security deposit. 3 4. Since the ad-hoc royalty has been fixed by the Court Receiver and therefore, without going into rival claims made by the parties in my view, it would be appropriate to appoint a Panel Valuer so that report can be submitted to this Court by the Panel Valuer as regards the valuation of the flat and also the compensation it is likely to fetch so as to facilitate the fixing of the final royalty. The learned counsel for the applicant/defendant No.1 Mr.G.D.Utangale states that his client would bear the expenses of the approved Panel Valuer on record. The Court Receiver to appoint Valuer out of the panel on his record. The applicant/defendant No.1 initially to deposit a sum of Rs.5000/- with the office of the Court Receiver within a period of one week from today. If the aforesaid amount is not deposited within one week, the benefit of this Order would not ennure to the applicant/defendant No.1. 5. Pending the submission of the report by the Panel Valuer or in the case of default in deposit of the initial charges by the applicant/defendant No.1, the applicant/defendant No.1 would continue paying the ad-hoc royalty at Rs.8,000/- per month as fixed 4 by the Court Receiver. In the event default is committed in deposit of the initial charges, the ad-hoc royalty would be treated as the final royalty fixed for the flat in question. 6. The learned counsel for the applicant/defendant No.1 states that the arrears of the ad-hoc royalty which are now to the extent of Rs.36,000/- would be deposited by the applicant/defendant No.1 within a period of of six weeks from date. It is made clear that the contention raised by the applicant/defendant No.1 in the above Chamber Summons has not been dealt with and the Chamber Summons is being disposed of by appointing the panel valuer. The applicant/defendant No.1 would therefore, be at liberty to file a fresh Chamber Summons after receipt of the Valuation Report. It is also made clear that in case, default is committed in deposit of the initial charges, the aforesaid liberty would not be available to the applicant/defendant No.1. The Chamber Summons is accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (R.M.SAVANT, J.) 5