KOCHU KUMARI Vs. KRISHNAN JANARDHANAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks revision of an order passed by the court below refusing to remove the Receiver. On the question as to whether this revision is maintainable or not, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the decision of Fazal Ali, C.J. of the Patna High Court (he then was) sitting with another learned Judge of the same court to the effect that whatever may be the position as regards orders actually removing Receivers, an order refusing to remove a receiver is certainly not appealable. (Vide Surendra v. Nasar Chand - ILR 25 Pat. 775). With great respect I follow that decision and hold that the order in this case is not appealable and therefore a revision lies. On the merits of the application, the lower court says that the facts alleged in the petition are insufficient to quash the order passed by this Court. It appears to me that the matter cannot be disposed of in this summary fashion and the learned Munsiff is bound to deal with the various grounds on which the relief by way of removal of the Receiver is sought and come to a conclusion. The order sought to be revised is therefore set aside, the revision is allowed and the case sent back to the Munsiffs Court for fresh disposal after bestowing attention upon the various grounds relied upon in support of the petition as also objection raised by the respondent in the matter of granting the relief. The records will be sent back to the court below forthwith. The court below is directed to dispose of the matter expeditiously. The costs of this revision will abide the result and will be provided for by the lower court in its revised record.