ORDER

Leave granted.

2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits deletion of Respondent No. 2. Accordingly, Respondent No. 2 is deleted from the array of the parties, at the risk of the Appellant. Respondent No. 3 is served but has not entered his appearance. Accordingly, we dispose of this appeal ex parte against this Respondent.

3. Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant.

4. The Appellant has challenged ad interim order dated 16th April, 1999 passed by the High Court by which an earlier order dated 21st December, 1998, appointing the Receiver was vacated. The sole reason was that on the fixed date and time, when the Receiver reached the place to take possession of the property, the Appellant was absent. We do not find this to be any good reason for vacating the order dated 21.12.1998. If on a particular date the Appellant was not present, another date should have been given by the Receiver to the Appellant. What weighed the court to appoint a Receiver, cannot dissolve only because of absence of Appellant on any one day to deliver possession of the property.

5. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order dated 16th April, 1999 and restored back the order dated 21st December,