Ranchi, Sept 4 : The Jharkhand High Court has refused to interfere with a trial court order appointing a receiver in a dispute involving a hotel business and commercial property jointly claimed by two brothers.
Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, hearing the matter, held that the receiver’s appointment was primarily intended to safeguard business records and ensure transparency in the management of the disputed property.
The dispute arose from a partition suit concerning property at Mouza Siram in Ranchi, where a multi-storeyed commercial building and hotel business are situated. One of the brothers approached the High Court challenging the receiver appointed by the civil court.
The appellant argued that the appointment could affect his possession and operation of the hotel and that there were insufficient grounds for such an extraordinary measure.
The respondent, however, maintained that the property had been jointly acquired and developed by the brothers and that monitoring was necessary to keep proper records of the business, including accounts, GST documents, licences and banking transactions.
The High Court noted that the trial court had not stopped the appellant from operating the hotel or maintaining the premises. Instead, its directions required information concerning the condition and functioning of the business and prohibited the creation of any third-party interest in the disputed property.
The court also observed that the question of who ultimately contributed the purchase consideration for the property would have to be decided during the trial.
Finding no legal infirmity in the lower court’s order, the High Court dismissed the appeal.
The case, Harjit Singh v Birendra Pal Singh, was heard as M.A. No. 452 of 2026.
