M A PALANI ACHARY Vs. D PREMCHAND JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are admittedly lessees who have been inductedinto possession by the Official Receiver appointed on 12-7-1973 in I.P.No. 7/73. The 1st respondent before me obtained a mortgage decree in O. S. No. 58/82 and, in execution thereof, became the auction purchaser himself. Thereafter, the said auction purchaser filed two petitions E.A. Nos. 42 and 43 of 1987 for physical possession of the property after evicting the petitioners tenants. On the other hand, the petitioners filed E.A.No 40/87 for grant only of symbolic delivery and not actual delivery.

(2.) The lower court took up E.A. 40/87 filed by the tenants first andstated that the tenancies being for short periods as originally granted by the Official Receiver, Ihey are liable to be evicted in the execution roceedingsi and that only some reasonable time should be granted for such eyiction. In the result, eviction was ordered by giving some time. It is against. this order that the tenants have preferred this revision.

(3.) It is new well settled that the tenants inducted by the OfficialReceiver acquire rights of tenancy under the tenancy laws, in as much as the Official Receiver is a landlord in whom the entire title vests. This court has taken this view in Nookalap Tati RamiReddy vs. The Official Receiver, Nettore #1 That was no doubt case with the Andhra Tenancy Act relating to agricultural land, but the same principle is equally applicable to the tenancies granted by the Official Receiver in insolvency proceedings in respect of urban properties coming within the purview of the Rent Control Law. The petitioner, therefore cannot be evicted, except by proceedings under the Rent Control Act. The order of the Lower Court directing eviction and merely granting some time, cannot be sustained. The revision petition is allowed and the order of the Lower Court is set aside and only symbolic delivery will be recorded by the Lower Court in the execution proceedings. So far as the actual eviction is concerned, it is, however open to the 1st respondent auction- purchaser to seek his remedies under the Rent Control Law. There will be no order as to costs.