ORDER
S.C. Mohapatra, J.
1. There was a dispute in respect of the suit lands in a proceeding under Section 145, Code of Criminal Procedure in the Court of Executive Magistrate, Cuttack, bearing Misc. Case No. 314 of 1977. In the said proceeding opposite party No. 1 was appointed as receiver. A title suit for partition was also filed for the self-same property. In the title suit a prayer was made for appointment of a receiver. As opposite party No. 1 had been appointed as a receiver in the criminal proceeding, he was appointed as receiver in Civil Court also. There is no document to indicate that the appointment of Opposite Party No. 1 as receiver by the Civil Court was communicated to him or being a receiver any accounts or security was demanded from him.
2. At the time of disposal of the suit on compromise, however, the trial Court directed the receiver to render the accounts. Basing upon this order, the petitioners filed a petition for directing the receiver to render the accounts. On being served with the notice of the petition, opposite party No. I appeared and claimed that he was not a receiver of the Civil Court but being a receiver of the criminal Court, he has rendered all the accounts in the 145, Cr.P.C. proceeding. On this statement of the receiver, without further enquiry into the matter, the application of the petitioners was dismissed which has given rise to this civil revision.
3. There is no dispute that the opposite party No. 1 was managing the properties as receiver. The only dispute is whether he was receiver appointed by the Civil Court or criminal Court. In either case he is liable to render the accounts. In case the accounts have been rendered in the criminal Court who initially appointed the opposite party No. 1 as receiver, no further accounts need be filed in the Civil Court and the interest of the petitioners would not be affected. If, however, opposite party No. 1 has not filed all or any of the accounts in the criminal Court he is to render the accounts in the Civil Court since he accepts the position as receiver who, in law, is obliged to render accounts and it has come to his notice that he had been appointed as receiver in the Civil Court.
4. If the accounts as alleged have been rendered in the criminal Court, the right of the petitioners is not affected. Therefore, the order need not be interfered with at this stage. Both the petitioner and opposite party No. 1 can appear in the criminal Court and get the accounts settled. I direct the parties to appear before the criminal Court for settlement of the accounts on 8th December, 1986 on which date the criminal Court shall fix a date for scrutiny of the accounts, if not already done.
5. In the result, the civil revision is disposed of with the aforesaid direction. There shall be no order for costs. A copy of this order be sent to the Sub Divisional Magistrate (Executive), Cuttack for dealing with the matter and for transmitting the same to the Magistrate who dealt with the 145, Cr.P.C. proceeding for the needful.