1. The Applications in O.A. No.710 of 2006 and A. No.3788 of 2006 have been filed by the plaintiff seeking inter alia (i) an interim order of injunction restraining the defendants from altering the superstructure or putting up any further construction in the suit property, and (ii) an interim direction, directing the defendants to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards damages for use and occupation of the suit property, pending disposal of the Suit for recovery of possession and damages for use and occupation. The Application A. No.476 of 2007 has been filed by the first defendant in the Suit under Section 9 of the Madra s City Tenants’ Protection Act, 1921, for a direction to the plaintiff to sell the suit land to them at a price to be fixed by this Court by appointing an Advocate Commissioner.

2. Heard Mr. Satish Parasaran, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff, who is the applicant in O.A. No.710 of 2006 and A. No.3788 of 2006 and Mr. O.R. Santhanakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the first defendant, who is the applicant in A. No.476 of 2007.

3. The facts which are not in dispute are as follows:

.(a) The plaintiff’s mother was the absolute owner of a la