SATYAPRASAD GHOSAL Vs. SUBODH CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are objections to the passing of the accounts of the Official Receiver in this partnership suit and relate to three periods of time. The first period of time is the second half of 1949, the second period of time is the first half of 1950 and the third period is the second half of 1950. In other words these objections cover a period of one year and a half from the middle of 1949 till the end of 1950.

(2.) The objections are made on three grounds. In the first instance it is said that the Official Receiver has charged commission on gross collections made by the Manager who is the defendant in this suit. Secondly the Official Receiver has debited the account with the salary of (i) a durwan at Rs 50/- per month and (ii) an estate clerk at Rs. 60/- per month. Thirdly it is said that the accounts as filed by the Official Receiver do not show what amount has been received by him in gross on which he has been charging the commission. These are the only three objections made before me to the passing of the Official Receiver's accounts.

(3.) The order appointing the Official Receiver as Receiver in this suit was made by Banerjee J. on 21-7-1949. It is necessary to set out the relevant portions of that order because most of the arguments relating to the first objection concern the terms of that order. The relevant terms of the order appointing the receiver are: