Un-4

☐ When can the court appoint a reciver ? State the powers and
duties of a reciver ?

Introduction

A Receiver is an individual appointed by the court to take

possession of or manage the property that is the subject matter of
a dispute. The court appoints a receiver in situations where a
party is entitled to certain rights or relief but cannot be properly
enforced without someone taking control of the property, or when
there is a threat that the property may be misused or wasted.

When Can the Court Appoint a Receiver?

According to Order 40 Rule 1 of CPC, a court may appoint a

receiver in the following circumstances:

1. To protect property in dispute – If there is a risk of property

being damaged, wasted, or misused by either party.

2. In cases of fraud or mismanagement – If the defendant is

fraudulently handling the property or causing financial loss.

3. To preserve and manage the property – If there is a dispute

over property ownership, and its proper management is required.

4. In cases of partnership disputes – When business partners

disagree over operations, and a neutral party is needed.

5. When property is involved in mortgage disputes – If a

mortgagee or mortgagor misuses the property.

6. When property is the subject of legal proceedings – If a legal

dispute continues for a long time, and the property needs
protection.
7. To prevent multiplicity of suits – When appointing a receiver
can avoid multiple legal cases related to the same property.

Powers of a Receiver (Order 40 Rule 1 CPC)

1. Take possession of property: The receiver has the power to take

possession of the property in dispute, as directed by the court.

2. Manage property: The receiver can manage the property,

including its maintenance, to prevent loss or damage. This can
include collecting rents or profits generated by the property.

3. Sell the property: With the court's approval, the receiver can
sell the property or its assets to prevent its depreciation or to
satisfy a claim.

4. Conduct legal actions: The receiver can institute legal actions

related to the property, such as recovering debts, rents, or
damages on behalf of the parties.

5. Distribute property: The receiver has the power to distribute

the proceeds or property in accordance with the directions of the
court.

6. Employ agents: The receiver can employ agents, such as

caretakers or professionals, to assist in the management or
preservation of the property.

7. Access to books and documents: The receiver may access and

examine any books, accounts, or documents related to the
property to effectively manage it.

Duties of a Receiver under the CPC

1. Follow Court’s Directions: The receiver is bound by the

instructions given by the court and must carry out all orders and
directions issued during the appointment.

2. Act with Good Faith: The receiver must act honestly and in
good faith, safeguarding the property for the parties concerned.

3. Maintain the property: The receiver must take reasonable steps

to maintain and protect the property from loss, damage, or
deterioration.

4. Account for all transactions: The receiver is required to keep

accurate records of all actions taken with respect to the property,
including income, expenses, and distributions, and submit these
accounts to the court.

5. Distribute proceeds properly: Any income or proceeds

generated by the property must be distributed in accordance with
the court's orders.

6. Report to the Court: The receiver is obliged to periodically

report to the court regarding the management and status of the
property.

7. Act as a neutral party: The receiver must not favor one party
over another and must ensure fair and impartial management of
the property until the case is decided.

Vijay Kumar v. Union of India (2012)

The Supreme Court observed that the appointment of a receiver
is an equitable remedy that is exercised when the court is
satisfied that it is necessary to prevent injustice or injury. The
receiver's duties are strictly defined by the court, and they must
act in the best interest of all parties involved.

Ram Kishan v. Smt. Raj Rani (1982)

The Court ruled that the receiver should act impartially and must
be neutral, ensuring the protection and preservation of property
until the dispute is settled.

Conclusion

In sum, the receiver’s role is to protect and manage the property

in dispute, ensuring it remains intact and preserved for all parties
involved until the final judgment.

☐ State the procedure for instituting a suit by an indigent person?

Introduction:

Under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) of India, an indigent person,

defined as someone unable to pay the required court fees due to
financial incapacity, has the right to institute a suit without paying
the prescribed fees. This provision ensures access to justice for
all, regardless of economic status. The procedure for instituting a
suit by an indigent person is outlined in Order 33 of the CPC.

1. Filing the Application for Permission

The indigent person must first apply to the court for permission to
file a suit as an indigent person (i.e., without paying court fees).

The application must be made in the form of a petition and should

include:

The details of the suit (the cause of action).

A declaration stating that the person is unable to pay the required

court fees.

A full description of the applicant’s financial status (showing that

they are an indigent person).

A list of assets and liabilities.

2. Verification of the Application

The application must be verified by the applicant (or an

authorized representative) on oath.

The court may, if it deems necessary, conduct an inquiry into the

truth of the statements made in the application.

The court may order the applicant to submit supporting

documents or evidence of their financial condition.

3. Court’s Inquiry into the Indigency

If the application appears to be in order, the court will issue a

notice to the opposite party, informing them of the application.

The court may then inquire whether the applicant is, in fact,
indigent and unable to pay the court fees. The applicant may be
required to provide a declaration of their income, expenses, and
assets.

The court may also consider any objections raised by the opposite
party regarding the applicant’s financial condition.

4. Decision of the Application

After the inquiry, the court will decide whether the applicant is
indeed indigent.

If the court finds that the person is not indigent (i.e., they have
the means to pay the court fees), it may reject the application.

If the court determines that the applicant is indigent, it will grant

permission to file the suit without paying the court fee.

5. Filing the Suit

Once the court permits the indigent person to file the suit, the suit
proceeds in the same manner as any other civil suit.
The applicant can file the plaint in the court where the suit is to
be instituted, following the regular procedures for civil suits.

The court may allow the applicant to file the suit even without
payment of the required court fee.

6. Conditions After Granting Permission

Even if the suit is permitted to be filed by an indigent person, the

court may impose certain conditions, such as ordering the
indigent person to pay the court fee if their financial condition
improves at a later stage.

If the suit is unsuccessful and the court awards costs to the other
party, the indigent person may be required to pay the costs.

7. Issuance of Summons

Once permission is granted, the suit is instituted, and the court

will issue summons to the defendant.

The suit will proceed as any other civil suit, but without the need
for the plaintiff to pay court fees.

8. Dismissal for False or Misleading Information

The permission to file the suit as an indigent person can be

revoked if the court finds that the applicant’s claim of indigency
was false or if they have concealed any facts about their financial
condition.

If the suit is dismissed or the applicant’s claim is found to be

false, the applicant may be ordered to pay the court fees, costs,
and any damages.

9. Costs and Expenses

Even though the indigent person is exempt from paying court

fees, they may still be liable for other costs and expenses in the
suit, such as the costs of witnesses, transportation, or other
related expenses. The court may, upon concluding the suit,
decide who will bear the costs of the litigation.

Rameshwar Prasad v. State of Bihar (2006):

The Supreme Court held that the application should be

examined thoroughly to ensure that the applicant is genuinely
indigent. The court should not lightly accept a false claim of
indigence.

Pratap Singh v. State of Rajasthan (1971):

This case court ruled that the applicant must prove their inability
to pay the court fee by providing clear and convincing evidence,
including a statement of income and assets. The court cannot
blindly accept the applicant's word without proper scrutiny.

Conclusion:

The procedure for instituting a suit by an indigent person under

the CPC ensures that the right to access justice is available to all,
regardless of their financial means.

☐ What are the procedures for filing the suits by or against the
government or public officer?

Introduction

In India, legal proceedings involving the government or public

officers are governed by Section 79 to 82 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (CPC). These provisions lay down the procedure
for filing suits by or against the government to ensure that legal
actions involving public authorities.

1. Suits by the Government or Public Officers

When a suit is filed by or on behalf of the government or a public

officer, it must be in the name of the Central Government, State
Government, or any other public officer.
Pleadings: The government officer or the representative of the
government should clearly state their official designation in the
title of the suit.

Verification of Pleadings: The verification of the plaint or written

statement must be done by the officer authorized to act on behalf
of the government. The officer's position or designation should be
specified.

2. Suits Against the Government or Public Officers

If the suit is against the government, it should be filed against the

Union or State Government. The government should be
represented by an authorized officer.

Notice Requirement: Before filing a suit against the government

or public officer, a notice must be given (typically under Section
80 of CPC), which mandates a two-month notice period.

Section 80: A notice is required to be served on the government

or public officer informing them of the intention to file a suit. This
notice should detail the nature of the claim, the cause of action,
and the relief sought.

Exceptions to Section 80: If the suit is for a claim under a contract

or for compensation in cases of death or injury, or when the law
explicitly permits filing without notice, the Section 80 notice may
not be required.

3. Government Officer's Liability in Suit:

Public Officers’ Liability: When the suit is against a public officer in

their official capacity, the officer will represent the government.
However, if the suit involves a personal act or negligence, it might
be filed against the officer personally.

Government Representation: In case of a public officer, the

government will usually provide legal representation for the
officer, especially in suits arising from their duties.
4. Stay of Proceedings

If the government or a public officer does not appear in the case

or takes time to make an appearance, the court may stay the
proceedings, giving the government reasonable time to respond.

5. Costs in Government Suits:

Generally, in government suits, the government bears its own

costs, but the court may order a party to pay the costs of the suit,
subject to specific circumstances.

Special Provision for Costs: In certain cases, the government may

be required to pay costs incurred by the other party, especially if
the suit was filed in bad faith.

6. Examination of Decrees Against the Government:

A decree can be executed against the government under Order 21

of CPC, but it must follow specific procedures, as the government
is immune from certain types of execution, especially regarding
its property.

7. Suits Involving Contracts with the Government:

If a suit involves a contract with the government, the provisions

under Section 70 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, may also come
into play. In such cases, special procedures may be followed.

8. Additional Requirements in Some States or Courts:

Some state-specific rules or high court rules may provide

additional steps, such as requiring prior approval from the
government for initiating certain types of suits.

9. Special Protections for Government & Public Officers (Section

81 & 82 CPC)
Government or Officers Cannot Be Arrested – A government
officer cannot be arrested in a civil case for an act done in his
official capacity.

No Property Attachment Without Court Permission – Government

property cannot be attached unless the court allows it.

Execution of Decrees Against Government (Section 82 CPC) – If

the court gives a judgment against the government, the decree is
not executed immediately. The court sends a report to the
government, giving it time to comply.

Important Points:

The notice requirement under Section 80 is mandatory unless

explicitly exempted.

Suits against government officers in their personal capacity can

be different from those filed against them in their official capacity.

Government representatives must follow proper authorization

procedures when filing or defending suits.

K.K. Patel v. State of Gujarat (2000

Facts: A public officer was sued without proving that the act was
done in his official capacity.
Held: The court ruled that the nature of the act should be
examined first. If it was part of official duties, the case would
require notice under Section 80 CPC.

Union of India v. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. (2004)

Facts: The government sued a private company without proper

authorization from the concerned department.
Held: The Supreme Court ruled that only an authorized officer
could file suits on behalf of the government.

In conclusion, filing a suit by or against the government or a

public officer under the CPC involves specific procedures to
ensure fairness and clarity. A mandatory 2-month notice must be
sent before filing the suit. The government is represented by a
Government Pleader and special rules apply, such as protections
from arrest and property attachment.

☐ Explain under what circumstances a reference can be made to

high court ?

Under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) in India, a reference to the

High Court can be made in certain circumstances where the lower
courts, such as district courts, encounter specific issues they
cannot resolve on their own. A reference essentially means that a
question of law or a matter of significant importance is sent to the
High Court for clarification or decision.

Circumstances Under Which a Reference Can Be Made

1. Section 113 of CPC - Reference to High Court: Under Section

113 of the CPC, when a district court feels that a decision it is
about to make involves a significant point of law, and the issue
has not been clearly settled by the law or previous cases, it can
refer the matter to the High Court.

2. Special Cases:

Conflicting Decisions: If the decision made by the lower court

contradicts a previous ruling of the High Court or any other higher
court, the matter may be referred to ensure consistency in the
legal system.

Important Legal Questions: When the case involves an important

or complicated legal question that could set a precedent for future
cases, the district or subordinate court may refer the issue to the
High Court.

3. When an Appeal Is Not Yet Allowed:

 If the district court feels that an appeal should be filed with the
High Court, but it requires a decision on a legal matter first, it can
refer the issue to the High Court before the appeal is taken up.

4. In Certain Cases Involving Jurisdiction:

If a lower court is unsure whether it has the jurisdiction to decide
a matter or if the matter requires a legal ruling on jurisdictional
issues, it can refer the case to the High Court for guidance.

5. Under Section 115 of CPC - Revision:

If a party is dissatisfied with the order of a lower court and
believes that the order is beyond the court’s jurisdiction, they can
apply to the High Court for revision. The High Court, in its
discretion, may consider the reference from the lower court.

Procedure for Reference

The lower court sends a detailed report of the issue or question to

the High Court.

The High Court then reviews the legal questions and provides its
opinion or ruling.

Based on the ruling, the lower court proceeds with the case in
accordance with the High Court's direction.

*Ravindra Kumar Verma v. Union of India (2000):

Issue: The lower court made a reference to the High Court

regarding the interpretation of the powers of the central
government under a specific statutory provision.

Ruling: The High Court ruled that when the lower court
encounters a legal question that is of general importance or
affects the interpretation of a statute, it can refer the case to the
High Court for clarification.

*State of Punjab v. S. M. S. Transport Co. (1990):

The court held that a reference to the High Court is necessary
when a lower court is unsure about the legal implications of a
provision that could impact the outcome of the case.

In short, references to the High Court under CPC serve to clarify

legal issues, ensure consistency, and resolve jurisdictional
conflicts in civil cases.

☐ What circumstances under which the court can grant temporary

injunction? Can it be modified?

Under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), a temporary injunction can

be granted by the court under certain circumstances to preserve
the subject matter of a dispute or to prevent harm to a party
during the pendency of the suit. The provision for granting
temporary injunctions is provided under Order 39, Rule 1 and Rule
2 of the CPC. The court may grant a temporary injunction in the
following circumstances:

Conditions for Granting Temporary Injunction:

1. Prima Facie Case:

The applicant must show that they have a prima facie case in
their favor, meaning there is a valid legal claim that warrants the
court’s attention. It doesn't mean that the case is conclusively
proved but that there is a good chance of success at trial.

2. Irreparable Injury:

The party seeking the injunction must demonstrate that

irreparable injury will occur if the injunction is not granted.
Irreparable injury refers to harm that cannot be adequately
compensated with money or that cannot be undone.
3. Balance of Convenience:

The court must be satisfied that the balance of convenience

favors granting the injunction. This means that the harm caused
to the applicant by refusing the injunction would outweigh the
harm to the defendant if the injunction is granted.

4. Adequate Remedy:

If there is an adequate remedy available through damages or

other legal means, the court is less likely to grant a temporary
injunction. A temporary injunction is typically granted when other
remedies are not sufficient.

Types of Temporary Injunctions:

Restraining Orders: Prevents a party from doing a specific act

(e.g., selling property).

Mandatory Injunctions: Directs a party to do something (e.g.,

restoring possession of property).

Modification of Temporary Injunctions:

Modification: The court can modify or dissolve a temporary

injunction at any time during the pendency of the suit, either on
the application of the party or suo motu (on its own).

If new evidence comes to light or if the circumstances change, the

court may alter the terms of the injunction.

the CPC allows the court to modify, vacate, or discharge the

injunction if it finds it necessary.

A party can approach the court to review the injunction if they

feel that the order is causing undue hardship or if the
circumstances of the case have changed.
Duration of Temporary Injunction:

A temporary injunction is granted for a limited period until the

final disposal of the case or until the court decides otherwise.

It may be extended if the court is satisfied with the continued

need for protection.

Grounds for Refusal:

If the court finds that the applicant has failed to meet the
necessary conditions (prima facie case, irreparable injury, balance
of convenience), the request for a temporary injunction will be
refused.

*R. P. Sharma v. Union of India (2001)

Principle: This case outlined the importance of the balance of

convenience and the fact that a temporary injunction is a
discretionary remedy.

Summary: The Court rules that the balance of convenience must

favor the party seeking an injunction, and this is one of the
essential conditions for granting a temporary injunction.

*Jai Singh v. Union of India (2003)

Principle: The Court ruled that irreparable injury is harm that

cannot be compensated by damages, which justifies the need for
a temporary injunction.

Summary: The Court granted a temporary injunction to preserve

the subject matter of the dispute and prevent irreparable harm.

The court exercises its discretion while considering whether to

grant a temporary injunction, and it does so based on the facts
and circumstances of each case.