S. Jagtar Singh Vs. S. Karamjit Singh Panjwar and Others
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 15525 of 1996
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 15679 of 1996)
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 15679 of 1996)
Petitioner: S. Jagtar Singh
Respondent: S. Karamjit Singh Panjwar and Others
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 15525 of 1996
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 15679 of 1996)
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 15679 of 1996)
Judges: S.P. BHARUCHA & S.C. SEN, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jun 12, 1996
Head Note:
CIVIL LAWS
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Order 40 Rule 1 and 3- Receiver – Application – Serious allegations –
High Court dismissing the application without going into merits. Held that
High Court was not justified. Civil Misc. Application No 13116 of 1995
to be considered afresh by High Court. (Para 4)
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Order 40 Rule 1 and 3- Receiver – Application – Serious allegations –
High Court dismissing the application without going into merits. Held that
High Court was not justified. Civil Misc. Application No 13116 of 1995
to be considered afresh by High Court. (Para 4)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. The first respondent to the appeal was appointed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, by its order dated 17-8-1994 in CRP No. 1388 of 1994, Receiver of Gurdwara Bir Baba Budha Saheb pursuant to a compromise. Thereafter a civil miscellaneous application was filed by the appellant in that CRP with an application to summon the Receiver on the next date of hearing. The civil miscellaneous application made serious allegations against the first respond-ent. The High Court, by the impugned order, dismissed the civil miscellaneous application, without requiring the attendance of the first respondent, holding that no case for recalling the order appointing him a Receiver had been made out. There is a statement on affidavit made by the appellant that the High Court did not go into the merits of the allegations made against the first respondent and this is borne out by counsel on the other side.
4. A Receiver holds property that is custodia legis. He holds it on behalf of the court. Where, therefore, serious allegations are made against a Receiver, particularly a private party ap-pointed Receiver, it is appropriate that the court should look into them, prima facie satisfying itself that there is no merit in them.
5. We are, therefore, of the view that Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 13116 of 1995 in Civil Revision No. 1388 of 1994 should be restored to the file of the High Court for being con-sidered afresh, after the first respondent has been given the opportunity of meeting the allegations against him and a hearing.
6. The appeal is, allowed accordingly, and the judgment and order of the High Court is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs.
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. The first respondent to the appeal was appointed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, by its order dated 17-8-1994 in CRP No. 1388 of 1994, Receiver of Gurdwara Bir Baba Budha Saheb pursuant to a compromise. Thereafter a civil miscellaneous application was filed by the appellant in that CRP with an application to summon the Receiver on the next date of hearing. The civil miscellaneous application made serious allegations against the first respond-ent. The High Court, by the impugned order, dismissed the civil miscellaneous application, without requiring the attendance of the first respondent, holding that no case for recalling the order appointing him a Receiver had been made out. There is a statement on affidavit made by the appellant that the High Court did not go into the merits of the allegations made against the first respondent and this is borne out by counsel on the other side.
4. A Receiver holds property that is custodia legis. He holds it on behalf of the court. Where, therefore, serious allegations are made against a Receiver, particularly a private party ap-pointed Receiver, it is appropriate that the court should look into them, prima facie satisfying itself that there is no merit in them.
5. We are, therefore, of the view that Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 13116 of 1995 in Civil Revision No. 1388 of 1994 should be restored to the file of the High Court for being con-sidered afresh, after the first respondent has been given the opportunity of meeting the allegations against him and a hearing.
6. The appeal is, allowed accordingly, and the judgment and order of the High Court is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs.
