:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1390 OF 2007 CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1390 OF 2007 CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1390 OF 2007 IN IN IN EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO. 41 OF 2006 EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO. 41 OF 2006 EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO. 41 OF 2006 IN IN IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1094 OF 2005 SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1094 OF 2005 SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1094 OF 2005 Jayesh Jayantilal & Co. ..Ori. Plaintiff versus Khushal Hansraj Gala ..Ori. Defendant And Jigar Khushal Gala & Anr. ..Ori. Respondents (Applicants) Mr. Prakash Ganwani i/b. RMG Law Associates for Plaintiff. Mr. J. Pandit for Defendant Nos. 1 and 2. CORAM : DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. CORAM : DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. CORAM : DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. DATE : 15TH APRIL, 2009 DATE : 15TH APRIL, 2009 DATE : 15TH APRIL, 2009 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. A Summary Suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed against the defendant for the recovery of an amount of Rs.31,65,416/- together with interest on the principal sum from 1.2.2002. The Summons for Judgment was made absolute on 22.11.2005 and a decree came to be passed. A Chamber Summons was taken out by the :2: plaintiff (Chamber Summons No. 97 of 2006) for the appointment of the Court Receiver as Receiver in execution for the sale of flat No. 12 situate in Kailash Cottage Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. The Respondents / Applicants are respectively are the son and the wife of the original defendant. They were joined as parties to the Chamber Summons. The Applicants had set up a case that the defendant had assigned and transferred his rights in respect of the aforesaid flat in their favour. The Chamber Summons was allowed by an Order dated 10.1.2007 with a direction that the plaintiff shall be entitled to execute the decree passed in the Summary Suit under the Warrant of Attachment dated 24.1.2006 by the attachment and sale of the residential flat in question. The learned Single Judge was of the view that the case of both the applicants totally lacked in bonafides and that the right, title and interest in the flat was that of the defendant. 2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants has stated at the hearing of the present Chamber Summons that the applicants have accepted the correctness of the order dated 10.1.2007 and do not wish to challenge the same. :3: 3. A fresh Chamber Summons is now taken out seeking permission to the applicants to sell the immovable property and to deposit the sale proceeds and for setting aside the Warrant of Attachment. 4. The applicants were heard when an order was passed on 10.1.2007 in the previous Chamber Summons taken out by the Plaintiff. The case of the applicants has been held to be lacking in bonafides as already noted above. At the hearing of the present Chamber Summons, it has been stated that the applicants have accepted the correctness of the order and do not wish to challenge the judgment in appeal. In that view of the matter, no relief can be granted in the present Chamber Summons. However, it will be necessary to record the statement that has been made on behalf of the plaintiff that in the event the original defendant, who is the father of the 1st applicant and the spouse of the 2nd applicant comes with a concrete offer for the purchase of the flat, within a period of two weeks from today commensurate with the market value of the flat, the plaintiff will have no objection to the offer being considered by the Sheriff in execution. However, it has been pointed out that the submission which has been made on behalf of the applicants is :4: lacking in bonafides since despite previous opportunities no concrete offer has been forthcoming. In the event that the defendant is in a position to furnish a concrete offer by private treaty for the sale of the flat, it will be open to him to bring it to the notice of the plaintiff and/or the Sheriff within a period of two weeks from today. It is needless to add that in the event the defendant fails do so, necessary steps may be taken in accordance with law, in compliance with the Order dated 10.1.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge. 5. Before disposing of the Chamber Summons it may be once again noticed that the aforesaid direction permitting the defendant to bring a concrete offer for the purchase of the flat has been issued with the consent of the plaintiff who is present in court. The Chamber Summons is disposed of. (DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.) (DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.) (DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.)