PRITHAVI RAJ SARIN Vs. RAMESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This miscellaneous appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1 (s) CPC assails the interlocutory order dated 25/01/2010 passed in Case No. 130-A/2009 (Old No. 7- A/1978) by IV Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Gwalior, whereby an application preferred by the plaintiff/ appellant for appointment of an independent Receiver in the backdrop of the objection to the working of erstwhile Receiver Late Harbans Lal Sachdeva (Defendant No. 1) and further expressing apprehension that in case son of late Harbans Lal Sachdeva (defendant No. 1) is appointed as Receiver then the property in dispute will be put to misuse, has been disposed of by appointing Ramesh Kumar Sachdeva (defendant No. 2) son of late Harbans Lal Sachdeva (defendant No. 1) as Receiver.

(2.) The primary ground of challenge to the above said interlocutory order is that once the opposite party alleges misconduct on the part of the erstwhile deceased Receiver, the name of son of erstwhile Receiver ought not to have been accepted for appointment of Receiver.

(3.) Instant case involves chequered history which for the sake of convenience is detailed below in a chronological manner:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_49_MPJR1_2012_1.html</FRM>