JUGAL KISHORE Vs. MANGI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This miscellaneous civil first appeal is directed against the order of the Additional, District Judge No. 1, Jaipur dated 22 -3 -75 rejection the application for appointment of receiver moved on behalf of the plaintiff appellants. The dispute relates to a house situated in Jaipur, Chowkari Ghat Darwaza, Rasta -Bheruji -Kundigaran, fully described in para No. 1 of the plaint. This house belonged to Mst. Loga who by a gift deed dated 29 -8 -52 dedicated the same to the defendant Thakurji Shri Laxmi Narainji Virajman Ramganj Bazar Khurra -Kawatiyan -Mochiyan. The plaintiffs brought the suit under Sec. 92, CPC in the court of District judge, Jaipur City for appointment of a Trustee to manage the property in dispute and also to frame a scheme in accordance with the object for which the property was gifted by Smt. Loga.

(2.) It appears from the record that two shops out of this disputed property were let out to the tenants, each at the monthly rent of Rs. 30/ -. The rest of the property is said to be possessed by the defendant Pujari of Thakurji Laxmi Narainji. The Pujari took possession of the two shops on 22 -10 -72 & of the remaining apartments of the house on 1 -4 -72. A decree for a sum of Rs. 4715.75 was granted against the plaintiff -appellants in respect of the mesne profits of the disputed house in a suit filed by the defendant Thakurji against the plaintiffs. It is not disputed before me that the tenants against whom suits are pending for recovery of arrears of rent have not paid any rent as yet to the defendants. But it appears that the plaintiffs have deposited the amount of Rs. 4715.75 decreed against them during the pendency of this appeal.

(3.) It is common ground between the parties that the entire property for the management of which the application has been moved for appointment of a receiver consists of the two shops in possession of the tenants in respect of which suits for recovery of arrears of rent are pending, the remaining apartments of the house which are in possession of the defendant. Pujari and the amount Rs. 4715.75 which is said to have been deposited by the plaintiffs as mesne profits of the property in dispute during the pendency of this appeal.