1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COURT RECEIVER’S REPORT NO.230 OF 2009 IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO.498 OF 2008 L and T. Finance Ltd. ....Petitioner. V/s Vejanand Parbatbhai Karetha & Anr. ....Respondents. Ms. Shakuntala Joshi for the petitioner. Mr. G.G. Ketkar, 1 st Assistant to the Court Receiver, present. CORAM: V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 5TH AUGUST, 2009 P.C.: 1. Though an attempt was made on two occasions to implement the order of this Court, machinery could not be seized by the Court Receiver since the respondents had removed the machinery and changed the location of the said equipment. 2. It is submitted by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that since the respondents have taken equipment to an undisclosed location, it is not possible for the petitioner to give exact location of the equipment. It is 2 submitted that if the prior intimation is given to the respondents, they shall continue to change the location of the equipment. 3. Under these circumstances, the Court Receiver is directed to take further steps in pursuance of the order dated 4 th December, 2008 passed by this Court and take possession of the equipment from the respondents. Court Receiver’s report is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) to (d). Respondents are directed to disclose the location of the equipment to the Court Receiver within two weeks from today. (V.M. KANADE, J.)