: 1 : USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER OF SUMMONS NO. 548 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.2047 OF 1981 ALONGWITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1528 OF 2008 Mrs. Roshan D. Karai and Anr. .. Plaintiffs v/s. Mrs. Sangita L. Mankani & Ors. .. Defendants ......... Mr. Vimadalal for the plaintiff and applicant in CHS 1528/08. Mr. U.J. Makhija, P.V. Bhagat i/by Vasant & Co. for defendant nos.1(c) (i) to 1(c)(iii) Mr. Subodh Joshi i/by Nandlal Kothari and Sabir for defendant nos. 2 and 3 and applicant in CHS 548/08. ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 17th JUNE, 2010. P.C. : 1. The present suit came to be decreed on 19th September, 2002. The Court Receiver was appointed in respect of the suit premises by order dated 20th March, 1982. Across the bar, learned Counsel Mr. : 2 : Joshi stated that monies have been deposited in the Court to see that the decree is satisfied. So far as the question of satisfaction of the decree there appears to be no dispute. Now the question before this Court agitated through this chamber summons is as to whom the possession in respect of the suit should be handed over. Title of the chamber summons goes to show that there are as many as 6 to 7 persons who are shown as owners in respect of the suit property. The Court is informed that the suit property consists of a building and the tenants are occupying various tenaments. Hence, there is no question of giving physical possession to a particular party. In the course of hearing, it was noticed that the defendants do not agree as to whom possession should be given in a representative capacity. The Court was also informed that certain Municipal Taxes / Water Taxes or other dues are not paid. Why there are arrears when the Receiver is appointed is a question, which need not disturb this Court at this moment. Certainly, when the suit is disposed of, it is not proper for this Court to go into the details as to why the taxes are not paid. This suit is for recovery of mortgage money and the suit has been disposed of. In a situation like this, who is real owner of the property or to : 3 : whom the possession can be given cannot be decided by this Court particularly when there are disputes and differences between defendants as various defendants want possession. In a situation like this, I feel that the Receiver should be continued for a short period and then allow the parties concerned to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court to have the question of ownership decided and naturally seek orders from the said Court as to whom the possession should be handed over during the pendency of the suit. 2. The Chamber Summons No.1528 of 2008 is filed by the plaintiffs for getting the monies from the Court. If monies have been deposited in this Court towards satisfaction of the decree, needless to mention that such payment of monies can be done upon plaintiffs or any of them provided plaintiffs deposit in the Court Title Deeds in regard to the suit property, which were handed over to the plaintiffs at the time of execution of the Deed of Mortgage. Learned Counsel Mr. Vimadalal appearing on behalf of the plaintiffs indicated that the cheque for payment of monies be drawn in the name of plaintiff no.1. Keeping in view the aforesaid discussion following order is passed to : 4 : dispose of these Chamber Summons. ORDER (i) The Prothonotary and Senior Master is directed to pay to plaintiff no.1 monies lying in the Court, which have been deposited by any of the defendants towards satisfaction of the decree passed in favour of the plaintiffs. If the monies are invested in the fixed deposit, Prothonotary and Senior Master shall redeem the said fixed deposit and proceeds of the said FDR/s i.e. principal amount and the interest accrued thereon shall be paid to the plaintiffs. The cheque shall be drawn in the name of plaintiff no.1. Such payment shall be made upon the plaintiffs lodging in the Court the original Title Deeds received at the time of execution of the Deed of Mortgage. A list of the said documents shall be filed. (ii) The Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay appointed in the present matter shall continue to act as such, till 31st July, 2010. If a particular defendant is interested in claiming possession of : 5 : the property, such defendant shall file appropriate proceedings so as to establish its rights to take possession in regard to the said property and obtain appropriate orders and depending upon the said orders, Court Receiver shall hand over the possession to the said person. If appropriate orders are not sought by any of the defendants w.e.f. 1st August, 2010, the Court Receiver will remain on record as the Court Receiver without discharging any functions and in particular without collecting any rent and other dues that the Court Receiver is required to do. (iii) A person who approaches the Court with a view to have possession of the suit property shall also apply to the said Court for getting the Title Deeds from the Prothonotary and Senior Master, which documents would be deposited by the plaintiffs at the time of getting monies from the Court. Both the chamber summons stand disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. Since the Chamber Summons No.548 of 2008 was taken out by the learned advocate Mr. Joshi for : 6 : defendant no.2 and 3, he is directed to serve authenticated copy of this order duly authenticated by Associate of the Court upon the Court Receiver within 7 days from today. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)