MADHUKAR RAJARAM PATIL Vs. MADHUKAR MALHAR VITWEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (J. D.) Raver below Exh. 1 in R. D. No. 9/96. By the said order the learned Executing Court passed an order of issuance of warrant under Order 21, Rule 43 of the C. P. C. for recovery of amount due from the judgement debtor and also issue show cause notice to him as to why he should not be prosecuted for offence of breach of trust for not depositing the amount as directed by Court. In order to appreciate the points involved in this revision application and in order to find out whether the executing Court has jurisdiction to pass such order. It is necessary to refer and state facts in detail. Respondent original plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff)instituted R. C. S. No. 201/81 against the petitioners original defendants (hereinafter referred to as the defendants) for injunction and subsequently the plaint was amended and the plaintiff sought possession of land S. No. 203 admeasuring 2 hectares 56 ares situate at village Raver and also in respect of land Gat No. 458. The said suit came to be filed on 24-11-1981. During pendency of the suit the plaintiff filed an application for appointment of receiver and accordingly, Receiver came to be appointed. After Receiver was appointed, two applications Exhs. 190, 211 came to be filed seeking some directions against the receiver and for removal of defendants who were in possession as the agent of the Receiver. After hearing both the sides the learned Civil Judge (J. D.) Raver by the order dated 18/09/1994 disposed of both the applications by passing the order which reads thus: "the plaintiff is hereby directed to suggest the name of an Advocate of at least 10 years standing at the Bar with the consent of defendant to be appointed as a Receiver, Advocate Shri S. S. Phalak is continued as a receiver until the appointment of new Receiver is made.

(2.) THE prayer of plaintiff for removing defendants as agents of receiver and to give the suit filed as agent to any other person in public auction is hereby rejected.

(3.) THE prayer of the plaintiff for taking action of Contempt of Court against defendants is hereby rejected.