Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Court Receiver's fees and commission fixed under rule 591 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980 could be reduced on the facts of the case.
Analysis: Rule 591 provides a prescribed percentage-based scale for the Court Receiver's remuneration on the Original Side, with discretion vested in the Chamber Judge to reduce the charges only in appropriate cases. The Court held that such discretion is not to be exercised routinely or by recomputing the Receiver's remuneration on a case-by-case assessment of actual work done. The authorities cited concerning private receivers were distinguished, because the present matter involved the Court Receiver functioning under the regular institutional framework of the High Court. The Court further held that a departure from the normal scale would require abnormal or extraordinary circumstances, which were not shown. The plea that the company was under BIFR proceedings and needed funds for rehabilitation was not treated as a sufficient ground to interfere with the prescribed charges.
Conclusion: No case was made out for reduction of the Court Receiver's fees and commission under rule 591.
Ratio Decidendi: Under rule 591, the prescribed remuneration of the Court Receiver should ordinarily be maintained, and reduction can be ordered only on proof of exceptional circumstances justifying departure from the statutory scale.