PUNE: The district court has dismissed an appeal filed by a 32-year-old woman seeking appointment as the court receiver of a flat she claimed to have partly financed and purchased jointly with her late husband, observing that such an appointment would effectively give her possession before the civil suit was decided.
District Judge-25 Mahendra R Jadhav, in an order dated October 5, upheld the January 24, 2025 order of the trial court rejecting the woman’s application. The court held that the woman and her 66-year-old mother-in-law were prima facie equal first-class legal heirs of the deceased and that appointing the woman as receiver could amount to partially decreeing the suit at an interim stage.
The appellant, Madhup Sarin Sinha, had filed a suit seeking partition, possession and other reliefs concerning the flat. Her mother-in-law, Sunaina Devi, and Awadh Kishor Prasad, 73, were respondents along with the realty firm.
Sinha claimed she had at least a half share in the property and had contributed more than ₹22 lakh towards its purchase from her independent income. She said the flat, purchased in the name of her late husband, Manish Kumar Sinha, had been constructed and was ready for possession, but possession had not been handed over following his death.
Seeking appointment as receiver, Sinha argued that the defendants were residing in Patna and the vacant flat could deteriorate. The respondents opposed the plea, contending that she could not be an impartial receiver and that her appointment would effectively give her possession through an interim application.
{{/usCountry}}Seeking appointment as receiver, Sinha argued that the defendants were residing in Patna and the vacant flat could deteriorate. The respondents opposed the plea, contending that she could not be an impartial receiver and that her appointment would effectively give her possession through an interim application.
{{/usCountry}}The court noted that the property had been purchased in the deceased’s name and that Sinha and Sunaina Devi were prima facie first-class legal heirs with equal interest, subject to the outcome of the suit.
“If the application for court receiver is allowed and she is appointed as a court receiver, it would amount to partially decree the suit at this stage itself,” the judge observed.
The court said Sinha could have sought appointment of an independent third-party receiver if protection of the vacant property was the concern. It also held that her financial contribution alone could not justify her appointment, as the respective contributions of her and her late husband would have to be determined after evidence.
The appeal was dismissed with costs and the trial court’s order was confirmed.