This appeal challenged the appointment of a receiver to let out a vacant suit property pending partition. The High Court held the order was fair and equitable to prevent vacancy and directed the appeal be dismissed, noting the appellant had later undertaken to repair the property.
The appeal was dismissed with no order as to cost.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~4
NARENDER MALHOTRA ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Abhishek Mishra, Advocate
versus
SURVECHA MALHOTRA & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Dinesh C.Pandey, Advocate with Mr.Tushar Sharma, Mr.Harsh Yadava and Mr.Palash Singhoi, Advocates
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R % 10.02.2016
FAO (OS) No.272/2015
Page 1 of 3
taken by the appellant to comply with the order dated July 23, 2013 and therefore a receiver should be appointed to take possession of the factory premises, appoint a security guard and after finding out a tenant - to let out the subject property.
FAO (OS) No.272/2015
Page 2 of 3
realized would be deposited in the Court - to be distributed as per the share of the parties when the suit seeking partition is finally decided.
Dismissed as infructuous.
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
FEBRUARY 10, 2016 mamta
FAO (OS) No.272/2015
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appointment of a receiver to let out a vacant suit property lying in partition is just, fair, and equitable.
Whether the appeal against the impugned order appointing a receiver is meritorious given the appellant's undertaking to repair the property.
Narenther Malhotra
Survecha Malhotra
Pradeep Nandrajog
Mukta Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
An appeal to a Division Bench against an order made by a single judge on the original side of the High Court.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
