JESINGJI KHODAJI Vs. RAMESHCHANDRA KANTILAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) [ His Lordship after discussing facts of the case held that: If pursuant to the order passed by the competent court the receiver negotiated with the tenants including the present plaintiffs and entered into an agreement of sale no subsequent order by the same court can be passed which may prejudicially affect the rights of the tenants who under the bona fide belief had entered into the contract. ] ... .. .. .. . ... .. ...

(2.) 18 Lastly it was contended on behalf of respondent No. 3 in all the appeals who were original defendants No. 3 in the suits that they being the bona fide purchasers for value without notice the sales .executed in their favour by the receivers cannot be affected even if it was held that the receivers had committed a breach of the contract. Reliance was placed on sec. 28(b) of the Specific Relief Act 1877 wherein it is stated that

(3.) In the case of Faki Ibrahim v. Faki Gulam Mohidin A.I.R. 1921 Bombay 459 the Bombay High Court held that