1 APP303/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.303 OF 2011 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.284 OF 2011 AND NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2282 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO.1605 OF 2001 Dr Manjuladevi Mistry and others ...Appellants v/s Subhadra S. Mistry and others ...Respondents Mr Gaurav Joshi with Mr Ashish Komal and Mr S.C. Gangan i/b M/s RMG Law Associates for Appellants. Mr Tushar Bhavsar for Respondent Nos.1(a) and 1(b). Ms J.M. Sidhawa i/b Mr Manoj Bhatt for Respondent No.2. CORAM : D.K.DESHMUKH AND R.G. KETKAR JJ. DATE : 3RD AUGUST 2011. 2 APP303/11 P.C. :- 1] Admit. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2) Admittedly, defendant Nos.1(a), 1(b) and 2 were permitted to shift to the Nepean Sea Road flat. Admittedly, they have not shifted, the reason given by them is that the flat is in such a condition that they cannot shift without repairs. Thereafter, the plaintiffs took out notice of motion No.284 of 2011 for direction to the Court Receiver to appoint an agent on leave and licence basis in relation to that flat. That notice of motion has been rejected by the learned Single Judge. Hence this appeal. 3) The learned counsel appearing for defendants submits that the plaintiffs have not shifted to the flat, therefore admittedly the flat is lying vacant. They have no objection to the Court Receiver appointing an agent in relation to flat No.16-C, 3rd Floor, Malabar Apartment, Nepean 3 APP303/11 Sea Road, Mumbai 400 036 if the plaintiffs bear the expenses that may be necessary for the Court Receiver to appoint an agent. In our opinion, as the flat is lying vacant it does not benefit anybody, if an agent is appointed, the amount of royalty will come in which would be to everybody s benefit. According to defendant Nos.1(a), 1(b) and (2), as the flat is in bad condition, no agent will come forward, but as the plaintiffs are willing to initially bear the expenses, there is no harm in making an attempt to find an agent. In our opinion, therefore, following order would meet the ends of justice. 4) Notice of motion No.284 of 2011 is granted in terms of prayer clause (a). The Court Receiver shall make an attempt to find out an agent. The initial expenses that may be necessary for publishing advertisement, appointment of agent etc. shall be borne by the plaintiffs. However, in case ultimately an agent is found and the amount of royalty comes in, the plaintiffs shall be reimbursed 4 APP303/11 the expenses incurred by the plaintiffs for the purpose of appointment of agent. Order accordingly, Appeal is disposed off. Parties to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate / Private Secretary of this Court. Certified copy expedited. ( JUSTICE D.K. DESHMUKH ) ( JUSTICE R.G. KETKAR )