Bombay High Court
Haldyn Glass Limited vs Saumyalate Shyama Shetty And Anr And The ... on 6 February, 2023
Author: N. J. Jamadar
Bench: N. J. Jamadar
14-IA671-2020INS783-2014.DOC
Santosh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SANTOSH
SUBHASH
KULKARNI
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 671 OF 2020
Digitally signed by
IN
SANTOSH
SUBHASH SUIT NO. 783 OF 2014
KULKARNI
Date: 2023.02.07
14:31:34 +0530
Haldyn Glass Limited ...Applicant
In the matter between
Haldyn Glass Limited ...Plaintiff
Versus
Saumyalate Shyama Shetty and anr. ...Defendants
And
The Court Receiver ...Respondent
Mr. Devansh Shah, i/b Vidhil Partners, for the Plaintiff.
Mr. Ishan Srivastava, a/w J. N. Jain, i/b A. Sathe, for
Defendant No.1.
CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J.
DATED : 6th FEBRUARY, 2023
PC:-
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2. By an order dated 17th January, 2023, Interim Application
No.671 of 2020 came to be allowed in the following terms:
"1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant.
2. The learned counsel submits that defendants have
been served with the copy of the Interim Application.
3. None appears for the defendants.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff submits
that the plaintiff would file affidavit of service.
5. Pursuant to orders passed by this Court on 13 th
March, 2018 and 1st August, 2021 appointing the Court
1/4
14-IA671-2020INS783-2014.DOC
Receiver, High Court as the Receiver of the subject property
and also appointing a third party as an agent of the Court
Receiver, steps were taken by the Court Receiver to give the
suit property on leave and license, in a public auction, by
inviting bids. However, no bids were received. The minutes
of the meeting held on 24th November, 2022 record that
efforts made to give the suit property on leave and license
basis, in a public auction, have failed.
6. In the circumstances, since the suit property is lying
unoccupied and, resultantly, not fetching any royalty which,
if realised, could be otherwise credited to the suit account,
it would be appropriate to explore the possibility of giving
the suit premises on leave and license by a private treaty.
7. For the present, it would be thus appropriate to allow
the application in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to
further orders to be passed by the Court in the event the
Court Receiver files a report after finding a prospective
licensee.
Hence, the following order.
ORDER
1] The application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) which reads as under:
(a) That the Court pass an order directing/ permitting the learned Court Receiver to appointment property brokers or property agents for the purposes of appointing a third party agent.
2] The expenses of appointing a private broker/ property agent shall, for the present, be borne by the plaintiff.
Application disposed."
3. On that day, a statement was made on behalf of the applicant - plaintiff that the defendants were served with the 2/4 14-IA671-2020INS783-2014.DOC copies of the said interim application. On the basis of the said statement, the Court proceeded to pass the aforesaid order.
4. On 23rd January, 2023, the learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that due to incomplete instructions incorrect statement was made that the defendants had been served with the interim application. Thus, the interim application stood over to today with direction to the Court Receiver not to proceed with the execution of the directions contained in the aforesaid order.
5. Mr. Srivastava, the learned Counsel, submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of defendant No.1. The learned Counsel undertakes to file Vakalatnama on behalf of defendant No.1, within a period of two weeks.
6. The learned Counsel, on instructions, further submits that defendant No.1 is not averse to the suit property being given on royalty by the Court Receiver by appointing a third party agent.
7. In view of the aforesaid statement, the Court Receiver shall comply with the aforesaid order.
3/4
14-IA671-2020INS783-2014.DOC
8. The Court Receiver shall also file a report as regards the arrears of maintenance charges in respect of the suit flat, which according to defendant No.1, have not been paid since 2019.
9. Let such report be filed within a period of three weeks.
10. Stand over to 27th February, 2023.
[N. J. JAMADAR, J.] 4/4