AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
We think there is no appeal u/s 588, Clause (24), of C.P.C. - vide Rani Keshobati Kumari v. Mac Gregor 12 C.W.N. 648. We dismiss the
appeal with costs.
But we have no doubt that the Subordinate Judge''s decision to make the order is a judicial order he considers the question whether he has
jurisdiction to make it and decides in favour of the jurisdiction) and one which can be revised u/s 622, C.P.C. We think the Subordinate Judge had
no jurisdiction to call upon the first defendant to furnish accounts, She was appointed receiver by the High Court pending an appeal, and, in our
opinion, no other Court had power to make any order or give any direction as supplementary to those given by the High Court, or without
authority given by that Court. There was no proceeding pending before the Subordinate Judge - Ramanadhan Chetty v. Narayanan Chetty ILR
(1903) M. 602 - and the order of the High Court informing him of the appointment does not give him jurisdiction to give directions to the receiver.
We set aside the order with costs in both Courts.