AMRISH KILACH Vs. INDIAN COMMERCIAL CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though this special leave petition is preferred against an interlocutory order, we are inclined to entertain it having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

(2.) The plaintiff filed a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act alleging that he was in joint possession along with the defendant of the suit premises and that during his absence from the country he was dispossessed from the said joint possession on 8/5/1996. He prayed for restoration of the joint possession. In the said suit he took out a Notice of Motion asking for several reliefs including the following relief:

(3.) The learned Single Judge, however, rejected the said Notice of Motion observing inter alia, that appointment of receiver would result in dispossession of the defendant who is, even according to the plaintiff's case, in possession of the premises now. He also opined that at this stage of the suit, the plaintiff cannot be put back in joint possession since that would amount to decreeing his suit at this interlocutory stage itself. However, the learned Single Judge recorded a clear prima facie finding in his order that until 8/5/1996, the plaintiff was indeed in joint possession of the said premises along with the defendant and that the plaintiff has been dispossessed from such joint possession forcibly.