1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9739 OF 2009 Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay .... Petitioner vs Mohammad Husen Oomerbhai & ors. .... Respondents Mr.Vineet B. Naik i/by Mr. Sukand R. Kulkarni for the petitioner. None for respondents. CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATE : 16th April, 2010 P.C.: 1 Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally. 2 Though the Suit was disposed of in the year 2006, yet the following observations are made on 7th September 2009 : “However, efficient Court Receiver has submitted his report to this Court on 17th August, 2009 which reached to Court today through proper channel. Perusal of the report speaks that no duty as stated above has been discharged by the Court Receiver. He has not submitted list of tenants, occupants and has not submitted accounts but has claimed cost of Rs.1,000/- out of the funds in his hand without disclosing the funds in his hand. Hence, the report found to be malafide. The Court Receiver is called upon to submit detail accounts of rent collected from all tenants, occupants, and 2 amount paid to BPT. Failure to submit accounts till next date, direction will follow to Registrar to lodge prosecution about misappropriation of funds.” 3 In the order dated 7.9.2009 of which the above observation as quoted was not necessary also in view of the additional report submitted by the Receiver on 18.09.2009. Therefore, I am of the view that in the present facts and circumstances, the above observations/remarks need to be expunged. 4 It is made clear that the challenge is restricted only with regard to the above observations so made as the matter itself was disposed of. The respondents have not responded to the notices issued. Therefore, there is no point, in keeping this mater pending for the same. 5 In view of above and considering the averments made in the petition, the Petition is allowed in terms of prayer (c). 6 Further it is made clear that as the Suit itself is disposed of, the Receiver stands discharged, subject to the charges, if any. 7 The Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)