Dismissed

Chainroop Dugar, v. Smt. Jatan Gulab Daga and 4 Ors.

Bombay HC25 Jul 2012APP/426/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of an appeal regarding the allotment of a godown. Upon hearing offers from various parties and considering an offer of Rs. 11.50 lakhs per month from M/s. Navneet Motors Private Limited, the court directed the Court Receiver to allot the property to them on a leave and licence basis, subject to advance deposits.

What did the court decide?

The godown was allotted to M/s. Navneet Motors Private Limited on leave and licence basis; deposits by other parties to be refunded after 30 July 2012.

Chainroop Dugar, Vs Smt. Jatan Gulab Daga and 4 Ors. — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

app-l-426-12.sxw

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

APPEAL(LODGING) NO.426 OF 2012 IN NOTICE OF MOTIION NO.142 OF 2012 IN COURT RECEIVER REPORT NO.201 OF 2012 IN MISC. PETITION NO.45 OF 2002 IN

¶4

T & I.J.PETITION NO.109 OF 2002

¶5

Chainroop Dugar ... Appellant Versus Smt. Jatan Gulab Daga and others. ... Respondents

¶6

Mr. Nishant Sasidharan i/by Mr. Sameer Ghonge for the appellant. Mr. H.V.Chande for respondent No.1. Ms.Purnima Awasthi for Mr.Sanjay Patel. Mr.R.J. Singh for respondent No.4. Mr.P.Y. Ladekar, Court Receiver present. Mr.Viral Patel, Authorised representative of M/s.Navnit Motors.

¶7

CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & N.M. JAMDAR, J.

¶8

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

¶9

P .C.

¶10

The appellant as well as the learned advocate for the appellant are present. The respondents as well as learned advocates for the respondents are also present. Mr. Sanjay Patel is not present but his advocate is present.

¶11

Mr. Sanjay Patel has so far deposited only Rs.2 lakhs and the learned advocate states that further amount of Rs.2 lakhs will be deposited. The learned advocate has, however, no authority to make any offer.

1 of 3

SRK

app-l-426-12.sxw

Mr. Viral Patel, an authorised representative of M/s. Navneet Motors Private Limited is present and states that the offer dated 21 July 2012 has been made to the Court Receiver. As per the said offer, M/s. Navneet Motors Private Limited is ready and willing to take the premises in question (Godown at Plot No.14-B, Mahal Industrial Estate, Paper Box, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai) on leave and licence basis at Rs.11.50 lakhs per month with annual increment at 10% per annum. Mr. Viral Patel, representative of M/s. Navneet Motors Private Limited states that M/s. Navneet Motors Private Limited will make the requisite payments within three days from today.

¶16

The learned counsel for the appellant states under instructions that the appellant is not ready to make any offer of Rs.11.50 lakhs or a higher amount. So also, the learned advocate for respondent No.4 states that respondent No.4 is not ready to match the offer of M/s. Navneet Motors Private Limited. As far as Mr.Sanjay Patel is concerned, he is not present in Court and the learned advocate says that she has no authority to make any offer. Mr. Sanjay Patel has also not deposited Rs.31 lakhs as per the order dated 16 July 2012.

¶17

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having considered the offer of M/s. Navneet Motors Private Limited, we direct the Court Receiver to allot the godown at Plot No.14-B, situate at Mahal Industrial Estate, Paper Box, Mahakali Caves Road, Andhrei (East), Mumbai- 400 093 on leave and licence basis at Rs.11.50 lakhs per month with annual increment of 10% per annum on a condition that M/s.Navneet Motors Private Limited gives an advance deposit of three months and also deposits two months' advance rent which will make it an aggregate sum of Rs.57,50,000/-.

2 of 3

SRK

app-l-426-12.sxw

After giving credit for the pay order of Rs.2 lakhs given to the Court Receiver, the balance amount of Rs.55.50 lakhs will be paid to the Court Receiver by 27 July 2012 by 5.30 p.m.

¶22

After M/s.Navneet Motors Private Limited deposits the amount as aforesaid and the pay orders are realized the deposits made by other parties will be refunded after 30 July 2012 but on or before 4 August 2012.

¶23

The Court Receiver shall inform the parties about all the formalities to be completed and the Court Receiver shall submit a report by 10 August 2012 about completion of the formalities.

¶24

In case of default, the amount of Rs.2 lakhs paid by M/s. Navneet Motors Private Limited to the Court Receiver shall be forfeited and the appeal shall be notified for hearing.

¶25

The request made on behalf of respondent No.4 who had offered to pay only Rs.8,30,000/- per month for the stay of operation of this order, is rejected.

¶26

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

CHIEF JUSTICE

N.M. JAMDAR , J .

3 of 3

SRK

Chainroop Dugar, v. Smt. Jatan Gulab Daga and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chainroop Dugar, v. Smt. Jatan Gulab Daga and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nagender Parakh Vs Securities and Exchange Board of INDIA15

Baburao Mahadev Yadav Vs Assistant Manager ( Bank of Maharashtra

Baburao Mahadev Yadav Vs Assistant Manager ( Bank of Maharashtra

R.B. Vinod Kumar and Anr. Vs Nile Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Afroz Hasan Fatta

Matoshree Shaikshanik Pratishthan and Ors. Vs All India Council for Technical Education, through Secretary and Ors.

1. Shri Aslam Shaikh and Ors. Vs 1. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.