Legal Status of petitioners accepted by tenants.

1. All these revision petitions are filed by the landlord.

2. Material facts, which necessitated filing of these revision petitions could be summarised thus:

Landlords filed three petitions for fixation of fair rent against three tenants as R.C.O.P.Nos.2461 of 1990, 2462 of 1990 and 2464 of 1990. The subject matter of the petitions are portions of the same building.

3. The property which are subject matter of these revision petitions originally belonged to Amba Shankar Josha Family Trust. The trust was created for the benefit of family members and for charitable purposes. The trust has found difficulties to carry out the purpose of the Trust for paucity of funds and they moved before this Court for modification of the terms of Trust so as to empower them to sell the immovable properties of Trust.

4. By order dated 28.11.1983, this Court granted such power subject to the condition that the sale could be executed only with the permission of this Court and it should have the concurrence of at least 3/4th of total number of trustees in office.

5. On the basis of the order of this Court, Trustees invited certain offers for purchase of the properties and on the basis of those offers received, they moved this Court for granting permission to sell the property to the highest offerer. Petitioners herein offered to purchase the property for Rs.9,00,000 and by resolution of the Trust, the offer of petitioners was accepted and a formal agreement was also executed. A sum of Rs.1,50,000 was received as earnest money. In this connection, it may also be noted that on the basis of offers made earlier, this Court already granted permission to sell the property to the highest offerer as per order dated 9.2.1984.

6. After obtaining clearance certificate from the Income-tax department and other authorities, sale deed was also executed in favour of petitioners on 12.4.1990.

7. On the basis of purchase the Trustees informed the tenants about the sale and asked them to attorn the tenancy in favour of petitioners. Petitioners also in their turn informed tenants that since they have purchased property from the Trustees, they are entitled to collect the rent and tenancy must be attorned to them. It is not disputed that all the tenants have attorned the tenancy and have been paying rent.

8. In September, 1990, petitioners filed applications for fixing fair rent in R.C.O.P.Nos.2461, 2462 and 2464 of 1990 against three sets of tenants.

9. As per order dated 8.9.1993, Rent Controller fixed fair rent. Not satisfied with the order, Landlords preferred R.C.A.Nos.242, 243 and 244 of 1994 on the file of appellate authority. While the appeals were pending, there was some development in regard to the sale deed executed in favour of the petitioners.

10. Two of the tenants viz., Gowrishankar and Purushothaman, who were in occupation of non-residential portion, moved an application before this Court to cancel the permission granted to the Trust for selling the property on the ground that they have offered Rs.14,20,000 and this fact was not brought to the notice of the court when permission was given to the Trust to sell the property in favour of petitioners. At the time when they moved this Court to cancel permission they further offered a still higher amount i.e., Rs.19,40,000 for purchasing the property. In view of this offer and also due to the fact that the offer already made by them was not brought to the notice of this Court, a learned Judge of this Court challenged the permission, already granted.

11. Aggrieved by the order, Trust as well as petitioners preferred appeals before the Division Bench. The Division Bench set aside the order and directed petitioners to pay a further amount of Rs.10,40,000 and to have the sale deed executed in their favour.

12. Against the judgment of the Division Bench, Gowrishankar and Purushothaman filed Civil Appeal No.3694 of 1996. Honourable Supreme Court set aside the order of the Division Bench and directed the Bench