1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3374 OF 2004 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 715 OF 2004 M.S. Dhillon ........Applicant/appellant versus Mr. Naresh Dhoot & ors........ Respondents. Ms. Lata Wadhwani i/b. R.G. Bhat adv. for the Applicant/appellant. Mr. N.R. Dhoot – respondent in person CORAM: A. P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 21st JANUARY, 2009. P.C.: 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant whereas the respondent in person. Few facts that are necessary to decide the present application are narrated hereinbelow. The present applicant is the original defendant whereas the respondent is the Plaintiff. The suit filed bythe Plaintiff has been decreed and aggreived thereby the defendant has filed an appeal which came to be admitted on 12­7­2004. While admitting the appeal, the applicant/appellant was permitted to continue in possession of the flat as an agent of the Court Receiver. Having found that the applicant had lost before the court below, the applicant was 2 permitted to occupy the flat subject to payment of royalty, apart from payment of maintainance and other charges to the society and the charges of the Receiver. After taking into consideration the carpet area of the flat and the report of the valuer, the royalty amount came to be fixed in the sum of Rs. 50000/­ per month and the same has been made payable with effect from 1­8­2004. The applicant has been saddled with the liability in regard to the payment of maintainance and all other charges to the society. In the concluding paragraph of the order it is stated that in the event of a violation of material terms of the agency agreement, the agreement would be liable to be revoked. A fresh agency agreement was entered into between the applicant and the Court Receiver on 4­8­2004. When the notice was issued to the applicant with a view to terminate the agency agreement, the present application came to be filed. 2. The next order which has a bearing in regard to the determination of the liability towards payment of maintainance and other charges to the soceity, it would be relevant to refer to the order dated 17­10­2008 wherein the liability of the applicant and the respondent has been crystalised. It has been observed in the said order that the Plaintiff/respondent herein would be liable to pay the amount to the society from January 1996 to August 1996. It is furtherheld that from Marfh 1997 till December 1997, it would be the liability of the defendant/applicant to payt he 3 amount to the society and lastly it is concluded that from January 1998 to August 1998 the amount has to be paid by the plaintiff to the society. It is undisputed that amount due to the society as and from September 1998 onwards till date is payable by the defendant/applicant. In paragraph 1 of the order, the court has directed that certain payments be given credit while finally calculating the amount due and payable. Acting as per the directions issued vide order dated 17­10­2008 and the subsequent order, the Court Receiver has submitted his report. 3. A perusal of the report submitted, indicate that an amount of Rs. 1,61,050/­ is due and payable by the applicant/defendant towards maintainance charges including interest charged by the society. Out of the said amount, a sum of Rs. 53,000/­ has been paid by the applicant pursuant to the order dated 4­12­2008 and thus according to the Receiver's report a sum of Rs. 1,08,050/­ are due and recoverabvle from the aopplicant, whereas a sum of Rs. 40,503/­ has been found to be due and payable by the plaintiff/respondent. The said calculation has been made by the Court Receiver as on August 2008, pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in various orders. Hence, I am of the view that as the parties are disputing the quantum of interest payable to the society, I do not propose to release any amount in favour of the society towards 4 the claim of interest made by the society. However, nontheless, the entire amount viz maintainance, other charges so also interest need to be secured. It is not in dispute that the royalty amount of Rs. 5000/­ has been regularly deposited by the applicant with the Receiver At this stage, the Plaintiff appearing in person has brought to my notice that till date, no amount has been deposited by the applicNt towards the cost and charges of the Receiver. It is the stand of the Receiver that as yet, they have not calculated the amount and no demand has been made from the applicant towards the same. Whereas the applicant states thata sum of Rs. 10,000/­ is lying with the office of the Receiver despite the fact that there had been no demand for the same. 6. In the facts and circumstances referred to hereinabove, I deem it appropriate to pass the following order : i) The notice so also the order of revocation of the agency agreement is quashed and set aside. ii) It is declared that the aggency agreement dated 4­8­2004 subsists. However it is clarified that the subsistance of the agency agreement would be subject to the orders to bepassed in C.A. No. 3125/04 and subject to the orders to be passed on Court Receiver's report dated 25­7­2008. iii) The applicant/appellant shall deposit a sum of Rs. 1,08,050/­ with the Receiver within a period of four weeks from 5 today. iv) The Respondent/Plaintiff shall deposit Rs. 40,503/­ with the Receiver within four weeks from today. v) The Receiver shall pay the maintanance and other charges to the society excluding the amount of interest charged by the society. Application thus stands disposed of. (A. P. DESHPANDE, J.)