Dismissed

Gyasuddin Kifayatulla Zariwala v. M/S. Sirsiwala Realty and Ors.

Bombay HC10 Apr 2014APP/229/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cross appeals regarding an interlocutory order declining appointment of a Court Receiver and directing the Defendant to maintain accounts. The Court dismissed appeals, refusing Receiver appointment due to Defendant's long possession but noting Plaintiff can seek further relief if accounts are not maintained properly.

What did the court decide?

Both appeals dismissed. No Court Receiver appointed. Defendant directed to maintain accounts remains operative subject to plaintiff's future prayer if accounts are improper.

Gyasuddin Kifayatulla Zariwala Vs M/S. Sirsiwala Realty… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

1 of 3 APP(L).181.2014

¶2

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

¶3

APPEAL (L) NO.181 OF 2014 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.23 OF 2014 IN SUIT NO.947 OF 2013

¶4

Gyasuddin Kifayatulla Zariwala versus M/s.Sirsiwala Realty and others

Appellant

Respondents

WITH

APPEAL NO.177 OF 2014 IN

¶9

NOTICE OF MOTION NO.23 OF 2014 IN SUIT NO.947 OF 2013

¶10

M/s.Sirsiwala Realty and others Appellants versus Gyasuddin Kifaytulla Zariwala Respondent

¶11

Mr.Jayesh Bhatt for Appellant in APPL. No.181 of 2014 and for Respondents in APPL No.177 of 2014.

¶12

Ms.Alpana Ghone, Ramesh Dube-Patil and Shama Mulla for Appellants in APPL. No.177 of 2014 and for Respondents in APPL No.181 of 2014.

¶13

CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. AND M.S.SANKLECHA, J.

¶14

DATE : 10 April 2014

¶15

2 of 3 APP(L).181.2014

¶16

PC :

¶17

These cross appeals are directed against an interlocutory order dated 27 February 2014 passed by the learned Trial Judge in Notice of Motion No.23 of 2014 in Suit No.947 of 2013.

¶18

By the impugned order, the learned Trial Judge declined to appoint Court Receiver in respect of the suit property. However, interim relief was granted restraining the Defendant no.1 from creating third party rights in the suit property and also directed the Defendant no.1 to maintain accounts in respect of suit property and to file the said accounts every six months in this Court with a copy thereof to be furnished to the Plaintiff's advocate.

¶19

The Plaintiff has filed Appeal No.177 of 2014 insofar as the learned Trial Judge has declined to appoint Court Receiver. Defendant no.1 has filed Appeal (L) No.181 of 2014 insofar as it directs him to furnish accounts in the Court with a copy thereof to be furnished to the advocate for Plaintiff.

¶20

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order under challenge. Learned counsel for Defendant no.1 submits that he is claiming perfection of his title over the suit property by adverse possession as he is in possession of the suit property since 1974. In the circumstances it is submitted that the learned Trial Judge ought not to have given any direction to him to furnish accounts.

¶21

3 of 3 APP(L).181.2014

¶22

Learned counsel for the Plaintiff submits that the Court Receiver should have been appointed of the suit property. This is because it consists of premises which are in occupation of tenants and Defendant no.1 creates fresh tenancy rights by permitting transfer of tenancy rights.

¶23

Having regard to the fact that Defendant no.1 is in occupation of the suit premises since 1974, we are not inclined to accept the prayer for appointment of Court Receiver in respect of suit property. However, upon Defendant no.1 furnishing accounts in the Court, if the Plaintiff makes out a case that the accounts are not being maintained properly, it will be open to the Plaintiff to make an appropriate prayer before the Trial Court which will be considered on the basis of such material as may be produced before the Trial Court.

¶24

Subject to above observations, both the appeals are dismissed.

¶25

(CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶26

(M.S.SANKLECHA, J.)

¶27

MST

Gyasuddin Kifayatulla Zariwala v. M/S. Sirsiwala Realty and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gyasuddin Kifayatulla Zariwala v. M/S. Sirsiwala Realty and 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

Sandeep Sudhakr Deshpande Vs the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Ushdev International Ltd. Vs Sims Copper Sdn Bhd and 4 Ors.

Shri. Nainesh Suresh Dolas Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Home Minister, Home Dept and Ors.

Ram Ramdas Samudre Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Nucleus Chem Oil Private Limited Vs Camlin Fine Sciences Limited

Kavis Fashions Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S. Dimple Enterprises and 3 Others