SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(SC) 735

SHIVARAJ V.PATIL, D.M.DHARMADHIKARI
Prabodh N. Shah – Appellant
Versus
S. B. I. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Dharmadhikari, J.-The appellant claims to be in occupation as tenant of premises described as Shop No. 828 in Parekh Market, Opera House, Bombay. M/s. Nikhil Diamonds [Respondent No. 4 herein] admittedly owns amongst others the said premises in the market.

2. The three Banks [respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 herein] filed Suit No. 607 of 1995 in High Court of Bombay on its Original Side for recovery of loans advanced by them to respondent No. 4 and its partners [respondents No. 5 to 11].

3. The Banks as plaintiffs in the said Suit sought appointment of Court Receiver under Order 40 Rule 1 Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code for short) for safe custody and proper management of the properties of the defendants. The Single Judge of the High Court rejected the prayer. In appeal the division bench of the Bombay High Court by its Order dated 3.11.1995, accepted the prayer of the Banks and appointed a Court Receiver on the properties which include the premises in question.

4. M/s. Nikhil Diamonds and their partners as owners of the building and the premises therein through their counsel appearing before the division bench stated that premises described as Shop No


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top