Laxmi Dental Export Pvt. Ltd. vs Yogesh Bagul and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Laxmi Dental Export Pvt. Ltd. vs Yogesh Bagul and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Court Receiver Report No.91 of 2025 allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b): seized products, machinery and items at Unit No.497/1, Lohiya Compound to be moved and handed over to the plaintiff on superdari; costs, charges and expenses to be borne by the plaintiff at this stage; plaintiff granted three weeks to undertake the exercise (goods lying in Nashik); report accordingly disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether directions should issue to move the seized products, machinery and items lying at Unit No.497/1, Lohiya Compound (premises taken on licence) and hand them over to the plaintiff on superdari.

Ratio / Principle

Since all that is sought is movement of the location of the already seized products, machinery and items, no party can have any objection to the report; there being no opposition today, the report cannot in the court's view be opposed.

Key takeaways

The Court Receiver Report is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).ratio¶19
The necessary cost, charges and expenses of the exercise shall be borne by the plaintiff at this stage.ratio¶20
As the goods are lying in Nashik, the plaintiff may itself undertake the moving/seizure-handover exercise and is granted three weeks from the date of the order to do so.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Commercial Division (Arif S. Doctor, J.), 4 March 2025: In Commercial Suit No.243 of 2022 (Laxmi Dental Export Pvt Ltd. v. Yogesh Bagul & Ors.), the Court Receiver - appointed by order dated 28 April 2022 and holding sealed/seized products, machinery and items including at Unit No.497/1, Lohiya Compound, premises taken on licence - sought directions in Court Receiver Report No.91 of 2025 to move the seized goods from that premises and hand them over to the plaintiff on superdari. The report was unopposed; the court held that mere relocation of already seized goods could attract no party objection and allowed the report in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b), directed that necessary cost, charges and expenses be borne by the plaintiff at this stage, and granted the plaintiff three weeks to undertake the exercise since the goods lie in Nashik. The report stands disposed of.

Digitally signed by MEERA MEERA MAHESH MAHESH JADHAVDate: JADHAV 2025.03.0619:23:50 +0530

5-crr-91-25.doc

1 / 2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION COURT RECEIVER REPORT NO.91 OF 2025

IN

COMMERCIAL SUIT NO.243 OF 2022

Laxmi Dental Export Pvt Ltd. ...Plaintiff Versus Yogesh Bagul & Ors ...Defendants

Mr. Hiren Kamod a/w Mr. Aman Marwah i/b Induslaw for Plaintiff. Mr. Ramesh Dube Patil, Mr. Ashish Gabhale, Ms Iraa Dubepatil i/b Jay & Co.for Defendant Nos.1 & 5.

Mr. Anuj Tiwari for Defendant No.2. Mr. Tushar Sonawane for owner Mr. Ramvilas Lohiya.

Mr. N. C. Pawar, OSD, Court Receiver present.

CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. DATED : 4th MARCH 2025

P.C. :

1 The Court Receiver was appointed by an order dated 28 th April 2022, pursuant to which, the Court Receiver had proceeded to take possession of certain impugned products, machinery and items from the defendants. The said products are presently sealed and seized in the various premises. The Court Receiver has filed the captioned report, i.e., Court Receiver Report No.91 of 2025, in which the court receiver has sought the following directions; that one of the premises at which the said seized material is lying is Unit No.497/1 at Lohiya Compound as more particularly mentioned in the site report submitted by the Additional Special

Meera Jadhav

5-crr-91-25.doc

2 / 2

Receiver who had helped the Court Receiver in implementing the order dated 28 th April 2022. Submissions that the premises in question namely, Unit No.497/1 at Lohiya compound is the premises taken on licence and it is thus by way the present report the relevant directions are sought to move those seized goods lying at the said premises to hand over the said seized goods to the plaintiff on superdari. There is today no opposition to this court receiver report as in my view there cannot be. All that is being done is for moving the location of the said seized products, machinery and items and, therefore no party can have any objection to this. In view thereof, the Court Receiver Report is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).

2 The necessary cost, charges and expenses shall be borne by the plaintiff at this stage.

3 Since the goods are lying in Nashik, the aforesaid exercise can be undertaken by the plaintiff for which the plaintiff is granted a time of three weeks from today.

4 The Court Receiver Report is accordingly disposed of.

(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)

Meera Jadhav