IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 957 OF 2008 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 957 OF 2008 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 957 OF 2008 in SECOND APPEAL NO. 374 OF 2008 Sunanda @ Chingubai Bharmu .... Petitioner (Orig.Defendant) Versus Sukumar Baburao Porlekar .... Respondent (Orig. Plaintiff) Mr. N.J.Patil, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. A.M.Kulkarni, Advocate, for the respondent. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE: 30th August, 2008. DATE: 30th August, 2008. DATE: 30th August, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The suit property belonged to deceased Bharmu Porlekar. The respondent, who is the original plaintiff, claims to be the nephew of the deceased Bharmu and, according to him, deceased Bharmu had bequeathed the suit property to him under a Will for which probate was also granted. He filed Regular Civil Suit no.166 of 2001 against the present appellant seeking possession of the property contending that she is in unauthorised occupation of the property. The defendant however contended that she is the lawfully wedded wife of the deceased Bharmu, who had married her in 1986 after the death of his first wife in 1985 and therefore, she claims to be the exclusive successor of Bharmu. Her Second Appeal is admitted. By this Application, she seeks stay to the execution of the decree passed by the first appellate Court. 3. Even though the Second Appeal is admitted, the fact remains that both the Courts have given concurrent finding that the present appellant is not the lawfully wedded wife of Bharmu. Not only that, similar finding appears to have been given in the probate proceeding and probate has been granted in favour of the respondent. Of course, the Appeal against that decree is also pending in the High Court. In such circumstances, if the present appellant is allowed to retain the possession without any condition and if finally her appeal is dismissed, it will be difficult, rather than impossible, to recover mesne profits from her for her unauthorised occupation of the property for long time. Therefore, in the interest of justice, I pass the following order :- (i) The trial court shall appoint a Court Receiver for the suit property and the Court Receiver shall also appoint the present appellant /defendant as agent. The royalty of the property shall be fixed by the Court Receiver after hearing the parties. If the appellant fails to pay the royalty within specified period, the Receiver may revoke the agency. She shall also maintain accounts of the income and expenditure of the said property. (ii) Subject to the above direction, the execution of the impugned decree is hereby stayed pending the appeal. The Application stands disposed of. (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.)