R. M. LOHDA, J.

( 1 ) THE learned single judge of this Court doubted the correctness of the view of another learned single Judge in the case of Veetrag Investments and Finance co. v. M/s. Premier Brass and Metal works Pvt. Ltd. , Mumbai, 2002 (3) Mah LJ 455 (Veetrag Investments I) and passed the following order :

"the principal question raised in this chamber Summons is that the disputed property (non-residential) is tenanted property and if it is so, the same cannot be subject matter of attachment and sale in the course of execution of the decree. Reliance is placed on the decision of the single Judge of this Court reported in 2002 (3) Mah LJ 455 in Veetrag Investments and Finance Co. Ltd. M/s. Premier Brass and Metal Works Pvt. Ltd. , Mumbai. In this decision, the Court has mainly adverted to the provisions of section 26 of the Maharashtra Rent Control act, 1999 to conclude that the tenant has no right to sublet or transfer the premises held by him whether they are for residential or non-residential purposes (see para 10) ; and on that basis, found that the leasehold rights cannot be put to sale. In my opinion, prima facie, by virtue of section 56 of the Act, which is a no