Mishra, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellants and learned Counsel for the caveator/respondent.

2. Under the impugned order, P.K. Sethurman, J. has ordered for the appointment of a receiver to take charge of the property in dispute, collect rent from the tenants, who were respondents 10 to 18 before him as also from respondents 1 to 7 in the suit C.S. No. 490 of 1989-and deposit the same into court, with a further direction to submit accounts once in three months in respect of the collection of rents. It is not in dispute that the first defendant in the suit, Devaki Ammal, was the owner and in possession and enjoyment of the suit property until she created mortgages in the year 1987. The mortgagees pressed for repayment and threatened to bring the property for sale. The first defendant approached one Bhairavi Finance Corporation for a loan of Rs. 4 lakhs on the security of the property, and accordingly, on 26.2.1987, the first defendant along with defendants 2 to 7 executed a simple mortgage in favour of Bhairavi Finance Corporation, and received a loan of Rs. 4 lakhs allegedly for discharging the earlier two mortgages in a sum of Rs. 2,93,725, and the balance paid by