The Court Receiver's office's functioning and working left much to be desired, and an independent inquiry on the administrative side was recommended to address the inefficiencies and avoid charges of misappropriation and mal-administration.

1. The Court Receiver's report and additional report are both placed before me in the following facts and circumstances.

2. The Appellants, in this Appeal from Order, had challenged the judgment and order dated 03.05.1980 passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Thane in Special Civil Suit No.37/1980 rejecting an application for appointment of the Court Receiver.

3. By an interim order dated 22.07.1980 passed by this Court, the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay was appointed as a Receiver on the suit properties consisting of land survey No.34/1 admeasuring 36 Gunthas and Survey No.35/3 admeasuring 1 Acre and 8 ½ Gunthas situate at Panchpakhadi District Thane and this Court further directed the Court Receiver to immediately take possession of the suit property. It was provided in the said order that all the persons who were present at that time in actual possession of any part of the suit property either land or structure should continue to remain in possession of the same and further directed the Court Receiver to collect the rent/ compensation from all the persons in actual possession, after verifying from them their present rights to remain in possession and the Court Receiver was further directed to take suitable direction from the Court in this behalf. Annexure-A to the Report is a copy of the order dated 22.07.1980.

4. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the representative of the Court Receiver took possession of the said suit property on 23.07.1980 and had submitted his report in that behalf on 25.07.1980 to the Court Receiver. Annexure-B to the Report are copies of reports dated 23.07.1980 and 25.07.1980.

5. It is stated that the Court Receiver's office has received a letter dated 20.03.1998 from Mrs.G.D.Nadodwalla, Architect appointed in the matter inter alia stating therein that after inspecting the said property it was found that the encroachment and unauthorized development are executed on site, and the report of the same is enclosed with the said letter. Annexure C to the Report is a copy of the letter dated 20.03.1998.

6. It is stated that in the meeting of parties to the suit held before the Court Receiver on 18.06.2003, the letter dated 03.12.2002 received by the office of the Court Receiver from the Plaintiffs was considered and it was stated that there is encroachment on the said land. In view of the above, it was decided to request the District Inspector of Land Records (DILR) to demarcate the suit property to enable the Court Receiver to give direction regarding construction of the boundary wall around the suit property as per the request made by the Advocate for the Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs were directed to pay the necessary charges of DILR and in the said meeting it was made clear that no correspondence will be entertained by the office of Court Receiver, if entered directly. Annexure-D is the copy of the minutes of meeting dated 18.06.2003.

7. By a letter dated 24.06.2003 the office of Court Receiver has written to the DILR for demarcating the suit property for ascertaining encroachment which is made on the suit property as per the report submitted by the representative of the Court Receiver. Annexure-E to the Report is a copy of the letter dated 24.06.2003.

8. It is stated that the DILR issued the notice dated 07.11.2003 fixing the date for demarcating/survey of the suit property. The representative of the Court Receiver visited the suit property as per the appointment fixed by the DILR and in the presence of the representative of DILR and others, the suit property was surveyed and the Court Receiver's representative submitted his report dated 16.12.2003. Annexure-F is a copy of the said site report.

9. It is stated that in the meeting of parties to the suit held before the Court Receiver on 06.01.2004, an appointment was fixed for verifying the factual position at the suit site as the office of Court Receiver has received a letter dated 10.12.2003 from the Advocate for Appel