1. This appeal deserves only to be dismissed. Pending a suit for partition, the first defendant was alleged to have inducted the appellants here, into occupation of portions of two buildings which are items 1 and 2 of A schedule. Under the final decree for partition, these portions fell to the share of the plaintiffs-respondents. When they proceeded to execute the decree for the recovery of possession, they were opposed by the appellants who contended, that they could not be evicted under this decree, and that, in any event, the provisions of the Travancore-Cochin Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Order, 1950, created a bar to such eviction. The objections have been overruled by the Court below and hence this appeal.

2. The first contention, that a partition suit is not hit by the provisions of S.52 of the Transfer of Property Act and that the appellants are not bound by the, decree for partition and recovery of possession, is opposed to the weight of decided cases and has to be overruled. The second contention cannot be sustained for the reason, that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant as between the respondents and the appellants. With the institution of t