RAM BABU Vs. OM PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal from order has been preferred against the order dt. 22nd Oct. 1983, passed by the Civil Judge, Etawah, in suit No. 20 of 1983 pending in his Court directing a receiver to be appointed on the ground that it was just and convenient to do so. The parties were required to submit within seven days the name of the person to be appointed receiver. It was also stated in the said order that in case the parties fail to furnish the name of the receiver within seven days the receiver shall be nominated by the Court. This appeal was preferred even before any person could be nominated as receiver.

(2.) Having heard counsel for the parties we are of opinion that this appeal is not maintainable in view of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Sunni Central Waqf Board v. Sirajul Haq, AIR 963 All 537 where it was held :-

(3.) Counsel for the appellant brought to our notice the decision of another Division Bench of this Court in the case of Saroj Rani v. Krishna Swarup, 1984 All LJ 1003. Firstly, in that case the decision in the case of Sunni Central Waqf Board (supra) was not brought to the notice of the learned Judges. Secondly, that case is clearly distinguishable even otherwise on its own facts. There an application for appointment of a receiver was made which came up for hearing before the trial Court on 27th Sept. 1983. In the course of arguments there was a suggestion made by counsel for the respondent that in case Suresh Chandra, defendant 1, was prepared to guarantee continued accrual average income of the firm he might himself be appointed a receiver. The trial Court directed that in case Suresh-Chandra was prepared to furnish security till the following day he might be appointed receiver failing which the parties may submit a list of two persons each from which the person to be appointed as receiver may be selected. An appeal was preferred in this Court against that order.