ARUN AGENCIES MATTANCHERRY Vs. ST ANTONYS OIL MIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the plaintiff. Plaintiff challenges the order of the Trial Court refusing to appoint a receiver. The suit is one for recovery of money. The plaintiff has got a serious case that the 1st and 2nd defendants are liable to pay a total amount of Rs. 2,41,454.94. According to him he is entitled to this amount since the amount is due to him on account of an over payment made by the plaintiff to 1st and 2nd defendants. The 3rd defendant has filed a written statement stating that at the time of transaction he was running the oil mill and that he is the person who is liable to pay the amount and he is willing to pay the amount received by way of over payment.

(2.) The court below found that there is no just and proper reason for appointing a receiver, particularly in a money suit.

(3.) Learned counsel submitted that extra ordinary circumstances are existent in this case which would enable proper justification for this Court to appoint a receiver in the case. The plaintiff has attached certain immovable properties and the mill and the articles belonging to the 2nd defendant in the mill. This circumstance is also taken into account by the court below.