JUDGMENT : 1. The petitioner complains of the perceived irregular procedure in an interim receiver being appointed under Section 20 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 without any notice to the petitioning debtor. 2. The creditor is represented. According to the creditor, there is a substantial amount which is due and owing from the debtor and the creditor has removed himself from the State. 3. Section 20 of the said Act permits the court to appoint an interim receiver over the property of the debtor or any part thereof, but ordinarily this should be upon notice to the debtor. Indeed, the provision provides for an interim receiver to be mandatorily appointed upon the debtor applying for insolvency, but the word used is “may” in other cases. At any rate, it goes without saying that an exceptional case has to be made out before the court may appoint a receiver without notice to the debtor. 4. The extraordinary grounds do not appear in the order impugned. 5. The order impugned dated April 13, 2017, in so far as it appoints a receiver without notice to the petitioner herein is set aside and the receiver is discharged, subject to the receiver filing his accounts in the lower court in the event he has dealt with any money. 6. This order will not prevent the opposite party creditor from applying afresh for a receiver to be appointed, but a receiver should, ordinarily, not be appointed ex parte unless extraordinary grounds are cited for such appointment. CO No. 2295 of 2017 is disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.