Appointment of receivers
Full Text
(1) Where it appears to the Court to be just and convenient, the Court may by order—
(a) appoint a receiver of any property, whether before or after decree;
(b) remove any person from the possession or custody of the property;
(c) commit the same to the possession, custody or management of the receiver; and
(d) confer upon the receiver all such powers, as to bringing and defending suits and for the realisation, management, protection, preservation and improvement of the property, the collection of the rents and profits thereof, the application and disposal of such rents and profits, and the execution of documents as the owner himself has, or such of those powers as the Court thinks fit.
(2) Nothing in this rule shall authorise the Court to remove from the possession or custody of property any person whom any party to the suit has not a present right so to remove.
Plain English Summary
Empowers the court to appoint a receiver of any property before or after decree when 'just and convenient', entrusting management and proprietary powers to the receiver as an officer of the court, subject to sub-rule (2) safeguarding third parties holding present lawful possession.
Key Legal Elements
- 'Just and Convenient' Test: Governed by sound judicial discretion, not arbitrary desire; evaluated under the 5 Pancha Sadacharas.
- Pre or Post Decree Appointment: Can be appointed pendente lite or in execution under Section 51(d) CPC to realize decretal debt.
- Officer of the Court: Receiver holds property in custodia legis for the ultimate successful litigant; cannot be sued without leave of court.
- Broad Managerial Powers: Realization, leasing, collection of usufruct, filing suits, executing conveyances, and property maintenance.
- Protection of Lawful Strangers (Sub-rule 2): Court cannot dispossess a bona fide third party whom no party to the suit has a present right to evict.
Practical Note
The Pancha Sadacharas & Restraint on Receiver Appointments: 1. The Five Golden Rules — T. Krishnaswamy Chetty v. C. Thangavelu Chetty (AIR 1955 Mad 430): Reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Kasturi Bai v. Anguri Chaudhary (2003) 3 SCC 225, the appointment of a receiver is one of the harshest remedies because it deprives a litigant of de facto possession prior to final adjudication. The court must satisfy 5 tests: (1) Matter of judicial discretion, (2) Plaintiff must show a strong prima facie title or high probability of success, (3) Property must be in imminent danger of being dissipated or lost, (4) Denial would cause irreparable injury, and (5) Plaintiff's conduct must be blameless. 2. Co-ownership Disputes: In a partition suit, a co-owner in physical possession will not be dispossessed by appointing a receiver unless there is clear waste, exclusion (ouster), or total denial of rents to other co-sharers. 3. Suing a Receiver Requires Leave: A receiver cannot be sued without obtaining prior leave of the court that appointed him; a suit without leave is liable to be dismissed.
हिंदी पाठ
(1) जहां न्यायालय को यह न्यायसंगत और सुविधाजनक (Just and convenient) प्रतीत होता है, वहां न्यायालय आदेश द्वारा—
(क) किसी संपत्ति का रिसीवर (समापक/प्रापक), चाहे डिक्री से पूर्व या पश्चात, नियुक्त कर सकेगा;
(ख) किसी भी व्यक्ति को संपत्ति के कब्जे या अभिरक्षा से हटा सकेगा;
(ग) उस संपत्ति को रिसीवर के कब्जे, अभिरक्षा या प्रबंध में सौंप सकेगा; तथा
(घ) रिसीवर को वाद लाने और उनकी प्रतिरक्षा करने के संबंध में, तथा संपत्ति के आपन (Realisation), प्रबंध, संरक्षण, परिरक्षण और सुधार के लिए, उसके भाटकों और लाभों (Rents and profits) के संग्रहण, ऐसे भाटकों और लाभों के उपयोजन और व्ययन, तथा दस्तावेजों के निष्पादन के संबंध में वे सभी शक्तियां प्रदान कर सकेगा जो स्वयं स्वामी के पास होती हैं, अथवा उन शक्तियों में से ऐसी शक्तियां जिन्हें न्यायालय ठीक समझे।
(2) इस नियम की कोई भी बात न्यायालय को किसी ऐसे व्यक्ति को संपत्ति के कब्जे या अभिरक्षा से हटाने के लिए प्राधिकृत नहीं करेगी जिसे हटाने का वर्तमान अधिकार (Present right) वाद के किसी भी पक्षकार के पास नहीं है।