1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.596 OF 2006 IN EXECUTION APLICATION NO.141 OF 2006 IN ARBITRATION REF. NO.787 OF 2001 A.C.Chokshi Share Broker Pvt. Ltd & Anr. ...Applicants Vs. Heena Jatin Desai & Anr. ...Respondents And Master Zaaran Jatin Desai and Master Eshan Jatin Desai ...Applicants Mr.A.A. Mukhari i/b. Purohit & Co., for Appliant/Respdts.1 & 2 None for Petitioner CORAM: SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED: 16 TH SEPTEMBER, 2008 P.C. 1. The Awardholders have obtained an Award on 26 th February, 2004. They have sought to execute the Award by attachment of the properties of the Respondents on 1st April, 2006. The properties under attachment are movable as well as immovable properties. 2. The Applicants must show their title. Both the 2 Applicants have produced a Gift Deed each dated 8th November, 2005 executed by one Mrs. Vimla Pratap Desai, who is stated to be their grandmother, as the Doner in respect of Flat Nos.301 as well as 302 being the immovable properties attached under the Warrant of Attachment. 3. The Applicants have also produced before the Court (though not annexed with the Chamber Summons) a registered agreement for sale in respect of Flat Nos.301 and 302 in respect of one of the attached properties. The agreement for sale is dated 2nd February, 1995. 4. Consequently the Applicants have shown a valid transfer in their favour from the original title holder, both transactions being duly registered. Consequently the immovable properties being Flat Nos.301 and 302 on 3rd floor, A-Wing, Eldorado, Kashinath Dhuru Road, Off Cadell Road, Prabhadevi, Mahim, Mumbai- 400 025 could not have been attached as the property of the Defendants. The attachment in respect of the immovable properties so made is, therefore, raised. 5. The Applicants have also sought to raise attachment on the movables mentioned in the inventory taken on 12 th April, 2006. The Applicants have not produced any documents 3 which could be accepted to show their title in respect of such movables finally. The Applicants have produced only a xerox copy of an invoice in the name of Vimla in respect of one TV. It is not shown whether it is the same TV which is attached. No evidence with regard to the sale is produced. No case is, therefore, for raising of the attachment on the movables is made out. 6. It is clarified that only because of registered documents of title in respect of immovable properties are produced by the Applicants requiring no further oral evidence that they are accepted and the case of immovable properties is determined. No such case of Applicants in respect of movables can be determined by producing any stray bills of movables without any further evidence and without any identification of bills with the specific movable properties attached. Hence, attachment in respect of movables is not raised. 7. The applicants were specifically directed to show service of the Chamber Summons since the Awardholders have not been represented. The Applicants have sought to serve the Chamber Summons initially upon the Advocate for the Awardholders. The Chamber Summons could not be served upon them. Hence, they sought to serve copy of Chamber 4 Summons upon the Awardholder directly. Advocate's copy of letter shows the stamp of the receipt of the Awardholders dated 10 th June, 2006. The Applicants have filed their affidavit of service accordingly which is now taken on record. Service is seen to be complete. Hence, the following order.:- ORDER i) The attachment levied on 1st June, 2006 on the immovable properties mentioned therein is raised. ii)The attachment levied on the movables pursuant to the inventory dated 12 th June, 2006 is not raised. iii)The Chamber Summons is disposed off accordingly. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)