RUKMANI DEVI Vs. R M LAKSHMANDOSS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals arise out of an order appointing the defendant in the suit as Receiver till the disposal of the suit. The plaintiffs are the sisters of the defendant. According to the plaintiffs, the properties described in Schedule A belong to their father and on his death, they devolved on them as well as the defendant. The father died on 15.3.1982 at Madras. The properties described in Schedule B are stated to belong to the mother of the parties. She died on 9.11.1991. There also the plaintiffs claim that they are entitled to equal share. Hence, the prayer in the suit is for partition and separate possession of plaint Schedule properties and allot 1/6 share in all the properties to each of them.

(2.) THE defendant contests the same by putting forward a will in his favour by his father with regard to the A Schedule properties. With regard to the C Schedule properties the defendant claims that he is entitled to 2/7 share while the plaintiffs are each entitled to only 1/7 shares.

(3.) THE said fact of deposit in the plaintiffs - account is admitted by the plaintiffs. Yet the learned Judge has appointed the defendant as a Receiver to be in management of the property as such till the disposal of the suit. Aggrieved by the said order, the plaintiffs have preferred an Appeal O.S.A.No.43 of 1994 stating that a third party Receiver should have been appointed. The defendant has preferred O.S.A. No.258 of 1994 questioning the appointment of Receiver. According to the defendant, there is no allegation at all of waste or damage to the property and in a partition suit, in the absence of such an allegation, no Receiver shall be appointed.