T. Krishnaswamy Chetty v C. Thangavelu Chetty
AIR 1955 Mad 43019541 min read
The case in brief30-second read
- Facts
- The plaintiff sued in forma pauperis for a declaration that alienations of two houses to defendants 1 to 3 were invalid, and applied for appointment of a receiver. The defendants claimed to be bona fide purchasers in possession under earlier decrees and objected that the application was made two years after the suit.
- Issue
- Whether a case was made out for the appointment of a receiver under O.XL R.1.
- Held
- The court set out five principles: (1) appointment is a sound judicial discretion, used where there is no other adequate remedy; (2) the plaintiff must show a very good prima facie chance of success; (3) there must be emergency, danger or loss demanding immediate action; (4) a defendant in de facto possession is not ordinarily dispossessed, unless possession was obtained by fraud or force or the property is in medio; (5) the applicant's conduct must be free from blame. None of the requirements was made out and the application was dismissed with costs.
- Principle
- A receiver is appointed only on five principles: judicial discretion, strong prima facie case, real danger, no disturbance of de facto possession save for fraud or force or property in medio, and clean conduct
Facts
- The plaintiff sued in forma pauperis for a declaration that alienations of two houses to defendants 1 to 3 were invalid, and applied for appointment of a receiver. The defendants claimed to be bona fide purchasers in possession under earlier decrees and objected that the application was made two years after the suit.
Issue
- Whether a case was made out for the appointment of a receiver under O.XL R.1.
Held
- The court set out five principles: (1) appointment is a sound judicial discretion, used where there is no other adequate remedy; (2) the plaintiff must show a very good prima facie chance of success; (3) there must be emergency, danger or loss demanding immediate action; (4) a defendant in de facto possession is not ordinarily dispossessed, unless possession was obtained by fraud or force or the property is in medio; (5) the applicant's conduct must be free from blame. None of the requirements was made out and the application was dismissed with costs.
Ratio decidendi
The words "just and convenient" in O.XL R.1 embody these five requirements, and the remedy is used with the utmost caution.
Exam use
How to use it in an answer
Cite for the principles on appointing a receiver.
Cite this
Citation
T. Krishnaswamy Chetty v C. Thangavelu Chetty AIR 1955 Mad 430Reported: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1131519/. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.