Mohan Shantanagoundar, J

Petitioners have sought for quashing the communication dated 21.01.2010 at Annexures-A to C and have also sought for a direction to the respondent not to disposes them from the property without due process of law.

At the time of issuing notice, this Court granted the order of stay. Now an application is filed by the respondent-Bank to vacate the interim order.

By the consent of both the Advocates, the matter is finally heard.

2. Petitioners are the tenants under the borrowers Smt. Jamunadevi, Sri Vimal Raj and Smt. J. Shakila Devi. The aforesaid three persons in turn mortgaged the property in favour of the respondent-Bank as security for the credit facilities given to one M/s.Bhavani Agencis. Since the amounts are not paid, the respondent-Bank claims to have taken symbolic possession of the property on 1.7.2007. Impugned notices are issued to the petitioners calling upon them to vacate the premises immediately to avoid any unpleasantness. Which means that the petitioners are directed to give vacant possession to the respondent-Bank.

The petitioners are the tenants who are continuing in possession in their own right as lessees. They cannot be e