IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1535 of 2008 TRIBENI SINGH & ORS Versus BINDESHWARI PRASAD & ORS ----------- 2 12.9.2008 I.A. No. 5538/2008 Having taken into consideration the facts mentioned in this application, the delay in filing of the civil revision application is hereby condoned. C.R. No. 1535/2008 Heard Counsel for the petitioner. On merits, this Court would not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. The grievance of the petitioner that a receiver appointed earlier has not rendered account and has not deposited the amount in the Court is actually only an icing on the cake. The cake actually is keeping the suit pending which is with regard to the claim of the parties, plaintiffs and the defendants in the Hat, which is being held on the suit land. That being so, this Court would find that the suit of the year 1996, which has led to successive appointment of receiver some time plaintiff, some time defendant, some time market secretary and now ultimately Anchal Adhikari, must come to an end which would the final solution of the dispute of the parties. The apprehension of the petitioner that the amount collected by any 2 receiver will be properly accounted for and its share will not be given to the petitioner at the time of disposal of the judgment is wholly misconceived. It is well settled that when a receiver is appointed, he remains under the control of the Court and accordingly, the rights of the parties with regard to any collection of amount by the receiver can always be adjudicated at the time of the final judgment. That being so, this Court would direct the Court below to take up the Trial Court of this case on day-to-day basis and see that the same comes to an end within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The Trial Court at that point of time will also in the judgment include a direction for sharing of the amount collected by the receiver during the pendency of this suit. This issue of deposit of amount collected by the receiver will be gone into on the basis of the evidence to be adduced by the parties and any observation made in the impugned order will not be conclusive and binding. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this civil revision application is hereby dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)