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 NO. 628 OF 2006 NO. 628 OF 2006 NO. 628 OF 2006 IN IN IN NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1723 OF 2005 OF MOTION NO. 1723 OF 2005 OF MOTION NO. 1723 OF 2005 IN IN IN SUIT SUIT SUIT NO. 66 OF 2004 NO. 66 OF 2004 NO. 66 OF 2004 Samarthmal Hajarimal Mehta ] .. Appellant (Ori.Plaintiff) Versus Shri Pirchand Misrimal Bhansali ] .. Respondent (Ori.Defendant) Mrs. Usha Purohit for the appellant. Mr. Birendra Saraf i/b M/s. Kartikeya & Associate for the respondent. CORAM: R.M. LODHA & S.A. BOBDE, JJ. DATED: 29TH AUGUST, 2006 P.C. : . Heard. 2. No interference is called for in the impugned order directing Court Receiver to fix the royalty in respect of the premises which are in possession of the plaintiff as an agent of the Court Receiver. Needless to say, while fixing the royalty the Court Receiver shall take into consideration all relevant aspects, : 2 : including the nature of the premises having been made available to the plaintiff for occupation during the pendency of the Suit. . Appeal is disposed of accordingly. 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.]