1 PGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Chamber Summons No.293 of 2009 IN Suit No.543 of 2000 Smt.Prafullata R. Varhadi .. .. Plaintiff v/s. Pushpalata C. Chury & ors. .. .. Defendants A n d Yashwant Shripal Patil .. .. Applicant Mr.Uday Warunjikar for Plaintiff. Mr.R.V. Govilkar for Applicant. Mr.P.G. Lad, AGP for MHADA. ----- CORAM : SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED : 23rd June, 2010 P.C. : 1.The Applicant has applied for a declaration that the consent decree dated 18.12.2008 passed in Appeal (Lodging) No.738 of 2008 in terms of the consent terms signed by the parties in the suit is not executable against the Applicant and the Court Receiver, who sealed his premises being Room No.99 of chawl No.5 of the suit chawl being Anaji Master chawl, be removed and the possession of the suit chawl be restored to the 2 Applicant. 2.The Applicant claims to have been in possession of the suit premises in the suit building being room No.99 in the suit chawl since about 1971. The Court Receiver has been appointed on 22.2.2000. The Applicant claims that under the aforesaid consent decree, which has been collusively obtained, the parties seek to recover possession from several of the tenants without following due legal process for recovery of possession and hence the Applicant has applied for a stay of the consent decree. The Applicant would be entitled to have a stay of the consent decree and of the Court Receiver acting thereupon only qua the Applicant s own premises. 3.It is argued on behalf of the Plaintiff that the stay application is premature and that only after the Court Receiver takes possession, can the Applicant take recourse to law and that the application is in the nature of obstruction proceedings which the Applicant cannot take. It is seen that the Court Receiver has already taken possession from two occupants of the suit chawl under the aforesaid decree dated 18.12.2008. The Applicant, therefore, apprehends that possession of her chawl also would be taken from him. 4.The Applicant has produced his ration card initially 3 issued on 7.1.1988 and later a new ration card issued on 3.5.2000, the electricity bills of September to November 1989, the election identity card issued on 1.1.1995 and his motor driving licence issued on 5.11.1998. 5.Consequently the Applicant is entitled to the reliefs sought. The Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayers (a) and (b). 6.The Court Receiver shall not take any steps to recover possession of the suit premises from the Applicant. (SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.)