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 APPEAL APPEAL APPEAL (LODG) NO. 569 OF 2006 (LODG) NO. 569 OF 2006 (LODG) NO. 569 OF 2006 IN IN IN NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1216 OF 2006 OF MOTION NO. 1216 OF 2006 OF MOTION NO. 1216 OF 2006 IN IN IN SUIT SUIT SUIT NO. 960 OF 2006 NO. 960 OF 2006 NO. 960 OF 2006 1. Dr. Shailaja Arvind Dabholkar & Anr.] .. Appellants (Ori.Plaintiffs) Versus 1. Bhagirathi C. Kale & 2 ors. ] .. Respondents Ms. Brenda D’Souza i/b M/s. M.P. Vashi & Associates for the appellants. Mr. O.P. Pandey for the respondents. CORAM: R.M. LODHA & S.A. BOBDE, JJ. DATED: 29TH AUGUST, 2006 P.C. : . The parties are mother, son and daughters. By the impugned order, pending hearing of the Notice of Motion, the Motion Judge has granted an order of injunction in terms of prayer clause (b), except the bracketed portion. 2. The plaintiffs have come up in Appeal praying that the Court Receiver be appointed. We are not persuaded to interfere in the impugned order. As : 2 : regards whether Court Receiver needs to be appointed or not the Motion Judge shall consider the said aspect while hearing the Notice of Motion. 3. Appeal is dismissed in limine. 4. All contentions of the parties are kept open to be agitated at the time of hearing of the Notice of Motion. Presently, the order of injunction protects rights of the parties. We request the learned Motion Judge to hear and decide the Notice of Motion expeditiously. Sd/- [R.M. [R.M. [R.M. LODHA, J.] LODHA, J.] LODHA, J.] Sd/- [S.A. [S.A. [S.A. BOBDE, J.] BOBDE, J.] BOBDE, J.]