MOHAMED HANIF ABDUL HAMID Vs. CHUNILAL UKABHAI PADIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Notice of Motion taken out by the applicants raises an interesting question with regard to the powers of this Court to grant subsequent leave in a case where execution had been levied on property in the hands of the Court receiver without leave of the Court.

(2.) The applicants had initially prayed that this Court may regularise the execution of the warrant of possession in respect of the decree in R.A.E. & R. Suit No. 555/4500 of 1963 in the Court of Small Causes at Bombay levied on 27th March, 1980 by the applicants on property in the hands of the Court receiver appointed in the suit. Shri Andhyarujina, learned Counsel for the applicants thereafter sought leave to amend prayer (a) of the Notice of Motion by adding the words, that this Court may grant subsequent leave to regularise the execution levied by the applicants.

(3.) Before I deal with the contentions urged by learned Counsel, it is necessary to recite a few facts herein below.