1. Since common issue is involved in all these Company Applications and since they are more or less heard together, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2. Official Liquidator Report No. 55 of 2008 is a compliance report filed by the Official Liquidator pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in respect of the subject matter of all these Company Applications and hence, the same is also being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

3. In all these Company Applications, the applicants have taken out separate Judge's Summons praying for quashing and setting aside the notices issued by the Official Liquidator dated 24.05.2007 and 10.10.2007. The applicants have also prayed for the direction to the Official Liquidator to restrain him from taking possession of the rooms occupied by them and situated on land bearing Survey Nos.410/1/B bearing Final Plot No.46 of T.P. Scheme No. 12 of Ahmedabad. All applicants have filed their separate affidavits in support of Judge's Summons.

4. Mr. R. S. Sanjanwala, learned advocate along with Mr. Dilip L. Kanojiya appears for the applicants and Mr. J.S. Yadav, learned advocate appears for the Official Liquidator in all these Company Applications.

5. It is the case of the applicants in all these Company Applications that by an order dated 07.03.1993 passed in Company Petition No. 79 of 1989, Vijay Mills Limited has been ordered to be wound up by this Court. The Company in liquidation owns land bearing Survey No.410/1/B, bearing Final Plot No. 46 of T.P. Scheme No.12 of Ahmedabad. On the said land, Chawl was constructed by the Company in liquidation which is known as Krishna Chawl. The said Chawl was given on rent to various persons. The Chawl is in existence for the last more than 70 years and ever since it was constructed, it was given out on rent to various persons. The persons who were given the Chawl premises on rent were / are not connected with the Company in liquidation and are independent tenants of the Chawl. The applicants are the lawful tenants of the rooms given to them on rent and they have been regularly paying their rent earlier to the Mills Company and thereafter to the Official Liquidator of the Company in liquidation. It is also their say that since they are tenants of the Company in liquidation, they are entitled to protection under the provisions of the Bombay Rent Hotel and Lodging Houses Rates Control Act, 1947. Neither the Mills Company nor the Official Liquidator has initiated any proceedings for recovery of possession of the property on any of the ground permissible under the Bombay Rent Act. The Official Liquidator has not even approached this Court for any orders permitting him to recover possession of the premises from the applicant. This Court has also not in any appropriate proceedings passed any order directing the Official Liquidator to take over possession from the applicants. No such order has ever been passed by this Court and no such order has been passed after hearing the applicants, affording an opportunity to show cause against such order.

6. It is also the case of the applicants that all the occupants of the Chawl have been served with the notices dated 24.05.2007 and 10.10.2007 calling upon them to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the premises in their possession. The said notices issued by the Official Liquidator are wholly without authority in law and without jurisdiction. It is settled position that by virtue of the order of liquidation, the relationship between the landlord and the tenant does not come to an end and the applicants continue to be the lawful tenants of the Mills Company in liquidation. The Official Liquidator has not initiated any legal proceedings against the applicants for taking possession of the premises from the applicants and hence, without any order from this Court, the Official Liquidator cannot demand possession from the applicants.

7. All these matters were h