Posted On by &filed under Calcutta High Court, High Court.


Calcutta High Court
Ram Ranjan Chakravarti vs A.B. Miller, Offg. Receiver Of The … on 8 August, 1884
Equivalent citations: (1884) ILR 10 Cal 1014
Author: T A Norris
Bench: Tottenham, Norris


JUDGMENT

Tottenham and Norris, JJ.

1. The appellant in this appeal is the Receiver of the High Court. The learned Counsel, who appears for him, urges only one objection to the decree of the lower Court, and that a technical one. He says that it is a point of principle and therefore he contends for it. The objection is this that there was no authority of the Court for making the Receiver a party to this suit. The plaintiff made him a defendant and a substantial defendant without having obtained the leave of the High Court. It appears to us indubitable that this contention is valid. It is an elementary matter that the Receiver of the High Court does not represent the owner of an estate. He is an officer of the Court, and as such cannot sue or be sued except with the permission of the Court.

2. As against the Receiver, therefore, the decree must be set aside with costs in both Courts.

3. The costs of the Receiver will be in proportion to the claim against him.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

73 queries in 0.352 seconds.