1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.719 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO. 968 OF 2001 Narendra Gokani .. Plaintiff V/s. Narottam D.Oza .. Defendant And Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay .. Respondent Mr.Bharat Vaishnawa for the plaintiff. Mr.Khayam Shaikh i/b.Mishra & Co.for the defendant . CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATE : 23rd September, 2009 P.C.: The defendant has taken out this Motion to vary the order dated 30th January, 2003 which was passed after hearing both the parties. Though, the Court Receiver took possession in 2 the year 2008, the fact remained that the Plaintiff who was alleged to be dispossessed therefore preferred this suit under section 6 of the Specific Performance Act and ultimately in view of the order now enjoying the said possession by paying regular royalty to the Court Receiver. The Conducting agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant has expired, that itself in my view is no reason to vary order dated 30th January, 2003. However, the defendant is free to take appropriate steps or proceed to take steps for possession based upon these facts. The liberty is granted accordingly. However, at this stage I am not inclined to vary the order dated 30th January, 2003. Notice of Motion is, accordingly, dismissed with liberty. No costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)