hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICUATURE AT MUMBAI ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL SIDE NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 314 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1641 OF 2005 M/s. Sailesh Developers and Anr. ... Petitioners Versus The Joint Chairity Commissioner, Maharashtra State and Ors. ... Respondents Mr. V.L. Desai with Mr. D.G. Rangras for Petitioner. Mrs. Madhubala Kajale, A.G.P. For R. No. 1. Mr. P.K. Samdani, Sr. Counsel i/by M/s. Kishore Thakordas & Co. for R. No. 8. Mr. C.K. Ardeshir i/by Madekar & Co. for R. Nos. 2 and 7. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & J.H. BHATIA, JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 18, 2010 P.C. In so far as prayer Clause (a) is concerned, the Petitioners have not taken permission of the learned Advocate General as required under the Contempt of Court Act. In the light of that, such prayer Clause is not maintainable and hence, rejected. In so far as prayer Clause (b) is concerned, this motion is on behalf of Respondent Nos. 9 to 12 whose application for joinder has been rejected by separate order passed in Chambers Summons. Hence, not maintainable. In so far as Prayer clause (c) is concerned, it is not possible for this court to grant such relief. Hence, Prayer Clause (c) is rejected. In so far as prayer Clause (d) is concerned, one fails to understand that when the property continues to be in possession of the trust, how this court can exercise jurisdiction to appoint a Receiver. Hence, Prayer Clause (d) rejected. In our opinion, this motion being totally frivolous is dismissed by imposing costs of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid within one month from today by the Petitioner to the Trust represented by Respondent Nos. 3 to 7. (J.H. BHATIA,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)