SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1936 Supreme(Mad) 220

Manavadan, son of Kuttimbatti Thamburatti – Appellant
Versus
P. K. Manavadan – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Menon, J.

1. This is an appeal against the order of Pandrang Row, J. in A.A.O. No. 70 of 1936 confirming the order of the Subordinate Judge of South Malabar at Calicut dismissing an application for the appointment of an interim Receiver pending disposal of O.S. No. 29 of 1935. The suit is by a junior member of Petinharakettu Tavazhi of Pudia Kovilagam for the removal of the managers of the tavazhi appointed under a karar of 1914. Pending the suit this application was made for the appointment of a Receiver for the management of the properties of the tavazhi. The learned Subordinate Judge dismissed the application, holding that it was not competent for the Court to appoint an interim Receiver in a case of this kind. Our learned brother, Pandrang Row, J., differed from the learned Subordinate Judge in his opinion on this point and held that it was open to the Court, when circumstances require, to appoint an interim Receiver in oases of this kind. We agree with our learned brother in his opinion that, in suits for the removal of a karnavan or a manager appointed under a family karar, a Receiver can be appointed during the pendency of the suit if a proper case is made out. The qu




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top