1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4257 OF 2009 IN APPEAL (L)NO.764 OF 2009 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1401 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO.1109 OF 2007 ... Lokhandwala Construction Industries Pvt.Ltd. & Anr. ...Appellants v/s. Rafiq Ali Mohammed Maradia ...Respondent ... Mr. Chirag Balsara with Ms. Usha Gadagkar i/b. M/s. Divya Shah & Associates, Advocates for the Appellant. None for Respondent. CORAM: D.K.Deshmukh & Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota,JJ DATED: 14th June, 2010 P.C.: Notice of Motion is granted in terms of prayer clause (a). Motion disposed of. (D.K.Deshmukh, J.) (R.P.SondurBaldota J.) 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL (L)NO.764 OF 2009 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1401 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO.1109 OF 2007 ... Lokhandwala Construction Industries Pvt.Ltd. & Anr. ...Appellants v/s. Rafiq Ali Mohammed Maradia ...Respondent ... Mr. Chirag Balsara with Ms. Usha Gadagkar i/b. M/s. Divya Shah & Associates, Advocates for the Appellant. None for Respondent. CORAM: D.K.Deshmukh & Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota,JJ DATED: 14th June, 2010 P.C.: 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 14th August, 2009 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in notice of motion no.1401 of 2007. That notice of 3 motion was taken out by the plaintiff itself for appointment of Court Receiver on the suit property. The learned Single Judge has appointed Court Receiver and had also directed the Receiver to appoint persons who may be found in possession as agents of the Receiver but without royalty and security. The appellant is aggrieved by this part of the order directing appointment of agent without royalty and security. In our opinion, considering that it is a case of the plaintiff itself that defendants are trespassers of the land and using the land for residential and shop purpose even though the land is reserved for garden, the learned Single Judge should not have directed appointment of the persons found in possession as agents to be in possession of the premises without royalty and security. In our opinion, considering the facts and 4 circumstances of the case, following order would meet the ends of justice: i)The order of the learned Single Judge appointing Receiver on the suit property will continue to operate. The Receiver shall, however, visit the property and prepare list of persons who are in actual possession of the premises. The Receiver shall also collect the details and documents from the occupiers in relation to their rights to be in possession and submit report to the Court and serve copy of that report on the plaintiff. On the report being served on the plaintiff, the plaintiff shall be at liberty to take out appropriate proceedings for appropriate orders including the direction for appointment of agents of the Receiver to be in possession of the property on 5 suitable terms including royalty and security. ii) The Receiver shall take steps to prepare the report as directed above as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of eight weeks from today. If any funds are necessary for the Receiver for this purpose, the plaintiff shall put the Receiver into funds. Appeal is disposed of. (D.K.Deshmukh, J.) (R.P.SondurBaldota J.)