Skip to content


Haji Mirza Masham Ispahani Vs. Mirza Ahmed Ispahani - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberO.C.J. Appeal No. 2 of 1926
Judge
Reported inAIR1927Bom256; (1927)29BOMLR214
AppellantHaji Mirza Masham Ispahani
RespondentMirza Ahmed Ispahani
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
practice-receiver, appointment of-application-court-chambers.;applications for the appointment of receivers should be made in the ordinary way by notice of motion in open court and not in chambers. - - but of course as regards the present case we have heard no arguments as to whether there was anything exceptional to justify the course actually taken.amberson marten, kt., c.j.1. in dismissing this appeal in the absence of any parties) we only wish to add that we must not necessarily be taken to approve of what mr. justice taraporewala has said as to the propriety of hearing applications for the appointment of receivers in chambers. as at present advised, we think that these applications should be made in the ordinary way by notice of motion in open court and not in chambers. but of course as regards the present case we have heard no arguments as to whether there was anything exceptional to justify the course actually taken.
Judgment:

Amberson Marten, Kt., C.J.

1. In dismissing this appeal in the absence of any parties) we only wish to add that we must not necessarily be taken to approve of what Mr. Justice Taraporewala has said as to the propriety of hearing applications for the appointment of receivers in Chambers. As at present advised, we think that these applications should be made in the ordinary way by notice of motion in open Court and not in Chambers. But of course as regards the present case we have heard no arguments as to whether there was anything exceptional to justify the course actually taken.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //