1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7179 OF 2010 Smt.Beena Prasanna Munot ..PETITIONER -VERSUS- Sidharth Prasanna Munot and others. ..RESPONDENTS ......... Mr. G.V. Wani, advocate for petitioner. ........ (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 11 st August, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The application for appointment of Receiver came to be dismissed. The petitioner is the original plaintiff. She has filed suit for partition and separate possession. She is step mother of the respondent nos.1 and 2. 3. Basic contention in the application is that the properties left by deceased Prasanna Munot, who was husband of the petitioner, were being mismanaged and wasted. The trial Court noticed that the respondent no.1 is running the business. The trial Court also noticed that there was no material on record to indicate that the respondent no.1 was not maintaining true accounts of the business. All said and done, the appointment of Court Receiver is 2 rather drastic step, which can not be resorted to without there being any substantial evidence about the property being wasted or mismanaged with some ulterior motive. No interference is, therefore, called for in the discretionary order rendered by the trial Court. 4. In the circumstances, the Petition is disposed of with direction that the final hearing of the suit shall be expedited by the trial Court and Special Civil Suit No.70/2008 be decided within nine months as far as possible and that the respondents be called upon to furnish the undertaking that the property involved in the suit will not be transferred to third party during pendency of the suit. The undertaking shall be obtained within a period of four months. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE gas/wp7179.10