Coherent Identifier About this item: 20.500.12592/bh1r0h

Tagore Law Lectures 1897. The Law Relating to Receivers in British India




v. Harris. , 126, 129 Cookes v. Cookes 48 Cooper v. Reilly . [...] v. The Widow of Balmakund 175, 189 Mitchell v. Candy . [...] 229 S. Sacker, 1x re Salway v. Salway Sandford v. Ballard Sangappa v. Shivbasawa Satoor v. Satoor Scaramanga v. Stamp Seagram v. Tuck Searle v. Chout Shadi v. Anup Singh . [...] He is not the representative of a party Or parties, but the representative of the Court. ' A receiver c;in only be properly granted for the purpose of getting in and securing funds which the Court at the hearing, or in the course of the cause, will have the means of distributing among the persons entitled to those funds. ' The receiver appointed in a particular suit is nothing more than the hand o [...] He will he protected by it in the proper discharge of the necessary duties of his office ; the possession of the receiver not being permitted to be disturbed without the special leave of the Court,8 and it will be treated as a contempt of the Court if any such interference takes place ;4 the reason being, as explained by Lord Eldon,fi that their possession is the possession of the Courts and the C



SARF Document ID