THREE of the original investors in Tipperary Crystal were refused an injunction yesterday in the High Court restraining the receiver from selling the company's assets. Mr Justice McCracken said he was not prepared to grant an interim injunction because the receiver was correctly appointed.

However, he granted leave for short service of an application to join the company's receiver in an action to prevent the sale of the assets of the company.

The three investors, Mr Oliver Walshe of The Forge, Ballymacague, Dungarvan, Co Waterford, Mr John Maher of Bridge Street, Carrick on Suir, Co Tipperary and Mr Philip Walsh of Crescent Drive, Hillview, Waterford, who are taking the action, are all former employees of Waterford Glass.

Ten days ago, Yeoman International acquired the debts of Tipperary Crystal from Allied Irish Banks and immediately appointed Mr John McStay as receiver to the company.

Mr John O'Kelly, counsel for the three investors, who yesterday made an ex parte application for the interim injunction, said they had each invested £21,000 in the company in return for, a 5 per cent shareholding in or about October 1988.

They are claiming that the company excluded them from participating in the company, ignored their rights as shareholders, failed to keep them informed of dealings which affected their interests and failed to give them notice of meetings.

They are alleging that the company restructured the shareholding of the firm without their consent in such a manner that their shareholding was reduced both in terms of voting rights and financial value at a time when the overall value of the company was increasing.

They are claiming that the company set up associated companies which were for the benefit of the directors and to the exclusion of the petitioners and that the affairs of the company have been deliberately manipulated so, as to maximise the directors control and the value of their shareholding at the investors' expense.

Mr O'Kelly said the company now claimed to be in financial difficulties and the receiver was anxious to sell its assets. The interim injunction was to prevent the receiver from proceeding with the sale until an order of the High Court for discovery was complied with.

His clients had seen their position reduced considerably to a point where the value of their shares was practically nothing. At the same time the company had increased greatly in value. They were now trying to discover how the company was being run.

Mr Justice McCracken said it was a matter for the receiver, who was correctly appointed, to exercise his discretion in carrying out his functions.

Mr O'Kelly said the company had been effectively asset stripped and they believed that the assets might be based in New York. He was trying to prevent a gross injustice by manipulation.

Mr Justice McCracken said that while he understood that Mr O'Kelly was looking for the value of the shareholding originally held by his clients, the position was that the company was in debt to the bank and the bank was entitled to realise it.

The judge said he would give short service of an application on Friday to join, the receiver as a party to an action to restrain him from selling the company's assets.