Court rules notice to vacate premises under Income-tax Act without jurisdiction. Petitioners granted relief, no costs awarded.

The court allowed the petition, ruling that the notice to vacate the premises issued under the Income-tax Act was without jurisdiction. The judgment emphasized that the respondents could seek other legal remedies for possession recovery but not through the coercive process under section 269UE. The petitioners were granted relief, and no costs were awarded in the case.

---

---

Issues:
- Tenancy rights of petitioners in a flat
- Execution of a decree against a former employee
- Auction sale of the flat in defiance of a court order
- Income-tax proceedings related to the flat
- Jurisdiction under section 269UE of the Income-tax Act

Tenancy Rights:
The petitioners claimed tenancy rights in a flat occupied by their former employee, who refused to vacate despite being called upon to do so. The petitioners initiated legal proceedings to recover possession of the flat and were successful in obtaining a decree against the employee. Subsequently, the petitioners were put in possession of the flat by the Court of Small Causes.

Execution of Decree:
Despite the court order for possession, the respondents did not hand over the flat to the petitioners and instead purported to transfer possession to an auction purchaser. The auction sale was set aside by a court order as it was conducted in defiance of the earlier court order. The petitioners were eventually put back in possession of the flat.

Auction Sale and Income-tax Proceedings:
An auction purchaser illegally broke open the lock of the flat, leading to a criminal complaint. Income-tax proceedings were initiated regarding the purchase and sale of the flat, with the Appropriate Authority determining that the flat was undervalued and ordering its purchase.

Jurisdiction under Income-tax Act:
The respondents issued a notice under section 269UE(2) of the Income-tax Act directing the petitioners to vacate the premises. The petitioners challenged this notice, citing a Supreme Court judgment that struck down certain provisions related to encumbrances on properties. The court analyzed the applicability of this judgment and concluded that the notice to vacate was without jurisdiction.

Conclusion:
The court allowed the petition, noting that the notice served on the petitioners to vacate the premises was without jurisdiction. The judgment clarified that the respondents could pursue other legal avenues for recovery of possession but not through the coercive process under section 269UE. The petitioners were granted relief, and no costs were awarded in the case.

---