KALIDAS PAL Vs. SRIPATI M ROYCHOWDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the order of the trial Judge dated the 5th July, 1977 directing substitution and amendment of the decree.

(2.) The relevant facts may be briefly recorded. One Satya Mohan Roychowdhury since deceased filed this suit on a mortgage for a decree under Order 34, Rule 4 in Form No. 9 of Appendix D to the First Schedule of the Code of Civil Procedure or any other appropriate Form. There are two defendants in the suit. The defendant No. 1, Kalidas Pal is alleged to be the mortgagor and the second defendant, Kali Prosad Gupta is alleged to be the puisne mortgagee. The defendant No. 1, Kalidas Pal, the mortgagor, duly entered appearance in the suit and filed his written statement. The other defendant Kali Prasad Gupta, the puisne mortgagee has also entered appearance and filed his written statement.

(3.) An application was made in the said suit for the appointment of a Receiver over the mortgaged property and in the said application a conditional order was passed. By the said order a Receiver was appointed but he was directed not to take possession, if the mortgagor defendant went on paying a particular amount every month. It appears that the mortgagor defendant had been paying the amount more or less regularly. During the pendency of the suit the mortgagor defendant, Kalidas Pal was adjudicated insolvent by an order passed by the District Judge of Hooghly in Insolvency Case No. 4 of 1.974. Thereafter on the application of the plaintiff Satya Mohan Roychowdhury since deceased an order was passed directing that Mr. M. M. Halder, District Judge of Hooghly as the Assignee of the mortgagor defendant to be added as a party to this suit and on the basis of the said order Mr. M. M. Halder was added as a party to this suit.