- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION. ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION. ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION. jmi COURT RECEIVER’S REPORT NO.394 OF 2008 ALONGWITH COURT RECEIVER’S REPORT NO. 91 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.926 OF 1982 The Bombay Diocesan Trust Association Pvt.Ltd. & Ors. ..Plaintiffs. vs. Mrs.Zainab Amirali Jaffer & Ors. ..Defendants. And Mrs.Gunwanti M. Shah. ..Respondents. .... Mr.Vachan Bodke, i/b. Chitnis Vaithy & Co., for Plaintiffs. Mr.M.A.Shah, i/b. A.G. Shah, for Defendant Nos.8, 13 to 16, 18 to 28, 31, 32, 35, 36 & 41. Mr. K.L.Vyas, Court Receiver. Mrs.U.S. Srivastava, Second Assistant to Court Receiver. .... CORAM CORAM CORAM: S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 13TH APRIL, 2009 : 13TH APRIL, 2009 : 13TH APRIL, 2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . By an order of this Court dated 21st November 2008, this Court had directed that the Court Receiver shall appoint a tax consultant from the panel of the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, to work out the taxes and permissible increases payable by the defendant nos. 2 to 41, flat purchasers/tenants in addition to any rent in N.A. tax in proportion to the respective area. 2. Accordingly, the tax consultant has submitted his - 2 - report which shows that an aggregate of Rs.14,87,473.20 (statement-B of the Court Receiver’s Report) for the period 1st April 2000 to 31st March 2009 is due and payable by the flat purchasers to the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. 3. In view thereof, the defendants are directed to deposit property tax in proportion to their respective shares in the Office of the Court Receiver within a period of 4 weeks from today. It is made clear that if the flat purchasers fail to pay the aforesaid amounts within a period of 4 weeks as ordered, the Court Receiver shall stand discharged without any further reference to this Court. 4. Parties, i.e. the plaintiffs and defendant nos.2 to 41 shall also pay the fees of the tax consultant equally. The plaintiffs shall also pay the costs of Court Receiver’s Reports No.91/2009 and 394/2008. In view thereof, both the reports stands disposed of. [S.J.KATHAWALLA, [S.J.KATHAWALLA, [S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.] J.] J.]