MENGANATHAN YASUWADIAN Vs. SUSAIRAJ GIANAMUTTIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, the appellant challenges the order dated 31.01.1997 passed by the City Civil Court in S.C.Suit No.218 of 1996. The notice of motion filed by the appellant was dismissed by the trial court. The dispute relates to shop no.38 from Mahatma Gandhi Market, Kings Circle, Mumbai. During pendency of this appeal by order dated 30th April, 97 this Court appointed a Court Receiver, High Court, Mumbai as receiver of Shop no.38 and directed the court receiver to take possession of the suit shop. Accordingly, the possession of the suit shop has been taken by the court receiver and the shop is presently under the lock and key of the court receiver. In terms of the order dated 30th April, 1997 the court was to decide as to who should be placed in possession of suit shop as an agent of the court receiver. However, there is no further interim order passed. With the result the suit shop is presently in possession of the court receiver and is presently locked. In so far as the appellant is concerned, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted before me that the appellant has no objective if the shop continues in possession of the court receiver during the pendency of the trial before the City Civil Court.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the Respondent, however, urged before me that the Respondent should be placed in possession of the shop as an agent of the court receiver. According to him as in the record of the Corporation his name appears as licensee of the shop he is entitled to be in possession of the shop as an agent of the court receiver. However, have gone through record of the case and I find that the Respondent has tried to part with possession of the shop when there was a specific order made by this Court directing him not to part with possession of the shop. In my opinion, conduct of the Respondent disentitles him to be in possession of the shop as an agent of the court receiver. In this background, therefore, in my opinion it would be in the interest of justice to continue the suit shop in possession of the court receiver during the pendency of the suit before the trial court.