1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 70 OF 2007. IN SUIT NO.2916 OF 1990. The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay : Plaintiffs. Versus M/s.Bhanji Vishram : Defendants And Bhanji Vishram Makwana & ors. : Respondents. Mr.U.J.Makhija i/by Motiwalla & Co. for the Plaintiffs None for the Defendants. None for the Respondents though served. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J DATED : NOVEMBER 28, 2008 P.C. 1. By the above Chamber Summons, the Applicant – original Plaintiff seeks the following relief :- 2 a) that leave be granted to the Plaintiffs under Order 21 Rule 50 sub-rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to execute the decree passed on 18/04/1996 against the Defendants on the property and Assets of the Respondents. 2. The Plaintiff had filed the above suit against the Defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.13,39,943/ being the deficit in sale account arising out of the sale of the suit consignment and for interest and costs. The above suit was decreed against the Defendants in the sum of Rs.22,51,109=31 with further interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the sum of Rs.13,17,740/- from the date of decree till realisation. The Plaintiff called upon the Defendants to pay the decretal amount. On the failure on the part of the Defendants to do so, the Plaintiff filed an Application for execution in this Court on 21/02/1998. Pursuant to the said Application for execution, the properties of some of the Respondents were attached and warrant for sale was thereafter issued. However, the Respondents contended that the properties, which were attached, were not the properties of the Defendants firm but were the personal properties of the 3 Respondents. Hence the warrant of sale could not be executed. The Plaintiff thereupon caused search and made inquiries upon which the Plaintiff came to know that the Respondents are the partners of the Defendants firm and have substantial properties. The Plaintiff has, therefore, sought leave under Order XXI Rule 50(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for execution of the decree against the properties of the Respondents herein. 3. None appears for the Defendants, so also the Respondents though served. The Plaintiff has filed an Affidavit of service as also there is a Report of the Office dated 16th April 2007 that all the Respondents are served. 4. Considering the relief sought in the above Chamber Summons and considering the fact that no cause has been shown, the Chamber Summons is required to allowed and is accordingly made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The Chamber Summons is accordingly disposed of. 4 5. All the concerned parties to act upon an ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the Court Associate.- [R.M.SAVANT, J]