(1.) LEAVE granted.
(2.) THIS appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 29. 9. 2005 whereby and whereunder a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court held as under:
(3.) LEARNED senior counsel appearing for the Receiver states before us that the possession had been taken principally from respondent No. 5 and not from respondent Nos. 1 to 4. However, the claim of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 appears to be that they had been continuing in possession of part of the suit premises for a long time and on or about 9. 8. 1994, pursuant to the order of the Court dated 8. 8. 1994, they were dispossessed by the Court Receiver.