RAM LAL Vs. GIAN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT No. 1-Gian Chand has filed an application under Order 40 Rule 1 read with Section 151, Civil Procedure Code for appointment of a receiver.

(2.) FACTUAL matrix of the case is that Shri B. N. Kakkar was appointed sole arbitrator on 20. 11. 1988 to settle the disputes between the parties. After holding arbitral proceedings, arbitrator gave his award on 30. 1. 1989. The arbitrator ordered both the parties to take the possession of the property as per the award, whereupon the appellants took possession of the property in dispute by meets and bounds. An application was filed before the lower Court for making award the rule of the Court. Respondent-applicant Gian Chand filed objections under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act. The learned Sub Judge I Class, Dasuya vide his order dated 27. 1. 1995 accepted the objections and set aside the award. Assailing that order, the appellants have filed this appeal. During the pendency of this appeal, respondent-applicant Gian Chand has filed this application for appointment of receiver.

(3.) APPLICANT -respondent No. l also pleaded that he is an old infirm man of 85 years old. He has no son. His only daughter is a widow. He cannot move without the help of another person. His wife is also aged 75 years. The appellants and other respondents have also constructed few rooms and installed a new machinery without the permission of the applicant-respondent No. l during the pendency of the objection petition filed by him. They have also obtained new electric connections in the firm premises and are thus, earning huge amount from the assets of the partnership firm. The applicant-respondent No. 1 has been completely deprived of the partnership firm and its profits. Appellants are not even maintaining correct accounts. If the appeal is dismissed then the applicant-respondent No. 1 will suffer irreparable loss, substantial injury and annoyance and he would not be able to enjoy the benefit from the judgment because by that time the machinery of the firm and other assets would be completely replaced and destroyed by misuse of the appellants. The appellants would also show the fictitious losses and expenses to burden the applicant-respondent No. 1 as he is having half share in the property, machinery and other assets of the firm. Hence, it is prayed that it is a fit case, a receiver be appointed and powers be given to the receiver for realisation, management, protection, preservation and improvement of property to collect rent and profits of firm thereafter. Applicant-respondent No. 1 Gian Chand filed his own affidavit in support of the petition.