1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 147 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO. 779 OF 1984 Subhash Murlidhar Gurjar ...Plaintiff Vs. M/s. Lokmitra Press and Publications Pvt. Ltd. ...Defendants And Prakash Narayan Tawade ...Applicant ----- Mr.R.V. Govilkar for Plaintiff Ms. S.M. Dandekar for Applicant . ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 3 rd February, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant and the Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff. 2. By this Notice of Motion, the Applicant seeks the following reliefs. "(a)That the Court Receiver appointed by His Lordship Mr.Justice S.C. Pratap by Order dated 2 27.4.1984 and confirmed by His Lordship Mr.Justice Lentin by Order dated 11.9.1984 be vacated. (b) That the Court Receiver be directed to hand over symbolic possession of Unit No. 51 to the Applicant son of the Defendant No.2. (c) That the Court Receiver be further directed to hand over the balance amount of Rs.1,90,331.00 lying to the credit in the above mentioned suit to the Applicant on terms and conditions, as this Hon'ble Court be deemed fit and proper. (d) That the costs of this Notice of Motion be provided for. (e) For such further and other orders which may be necessary and fit in the circumstances of the case may be granted." 3. The learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is a son of Defendant No.2 and by an ad- interim order dated 27 th April, 1984, this Court was pleased to appoint the Court Receiver in terms of prayer clause (a) and as a result, the Court Receiver had taken possession of the suit property in the year 1984. It is submitted that the Defendant No.2 died during the pendency of the suit and the Plaintiff has not brought the heirs of the Defendant No.2 on record and as a result, by order dated 16 th October, 2008, this Court has passed an order stating therein that 3 if no steps are taken by the Plaintiff to bring the legal heirs of the Defendant Nos.2,3 and 5 on or before 18 th December, 2008, the suit shall stand abated against the Defendants. It is submitted that suit is abated against them and in this Suit, the Court Receiver may be discharged and further consequential reliefs as prayed by the Applicant in the Notice of Motion. 4. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Plaintiff, on the other hand, submits that the suit has been filed by the Plaintiff under section 6 of the Specific Reliefs Act against the Defendant No.1 and others. He submits that the Defendant No.1 is a private limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and as such, it has a perpetual seal and succession and suit against the Defendant No. 1 has continued and, therefore, at this stage, the relief claimed by the Applicant cannot be granted. 5. There is much substance in the submission made by the learned Counsel for the Plaintiff. The Defendant No.1 being a private limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act has a perpetual seal and succession and it is an artificial person and, therefore, the suit as against the Defendant Nos. 1 and 4 has not abated. Under these circumstances, 4 therefore, in my view, at this stage the relief claimed by the Applicant cannot be granted. Liberty is given to the Applicant to take out an appropriate proceeding, if so advised. (V.M. KANADE J.)