Back
K. MANMADHA RAO
Movva Venkateswara Raodied – Appellant
Versus
M. Subba Rao Died – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appointment of a receiver requested due to property mismanagement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. counsels argue on mismanagement and the necessity of a receiver. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's decision to set aside prior order and direct fresh disposal. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. no costs ordered and dismissal of miscellaneous applications. (Para 8 , 9) |
ORDER :
1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the order dated 17.08.2018 in I.A. No. 2064 of 2017 in O.S. No. 306 of 2014 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Nuzvid, Krishna District.
2. Originally the petitioner/plaintiff filed suit in O.S. No. 306 of 2014 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Nuzvid, (for short “the trial Court”) to appoint a receiver to take possession of the suit schedule properties item No. 1 to 4 and manage the same and deposit the sale proceeds of the yielding crop into count and income in item No. 1 to 4 for which to preserve the suit properties and also the properties are not wasted or mismanaged.
3. During pendency of the above suit, the petitioner/plaintiff filed I.A. No. 2064 of 2017 before the trial Court, seeking to appoint a receiver to take possession of suit schedule properties i.e. items
The appointment of a Receiver requires a prima facie case, emergent circumstances, and cannot violate lawful possession rights, which were not established in this case.
Appointment of Receiver – Court would not appoint Receiver until and unless there are certain compelling reasons.
The appointment of a receiver requires clear evidence of mismanagement and an element of urgency, which was not established in this case.
Appointment of a receiver requires a judicious exercise of discretion; failure to adhere to procedural fairness resulted in setting aside the trial court's order.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the City Civil Court had no authority in law to entertain an application in a disposed of suit against which an appeal had already been pendin....
The court upheld the grant of temporary injunction based on the respondents' ability to show prima facie case and balance of convenience in their favor.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
