https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278589 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's order and directing the Court Receiver to take possession of the suit premises. The appellant was appointed as the agent, with possession to be handed over within eight weeks. Respondent No. 2 could apply for vacation or variation of the order if establishing the sub-tenancy claim. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 were jointly and severally ordered to pay the appellant's costs of Rs. 20,000. No action was taken against respondent No. 3. en-us Fri, 06 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:14:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278589 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's order and directing the Court Receiver to take possession of the suit premises. The appellant was appointed as the agent, with possession to be handed over within eight weeks. Respondent No. 2 could apply for vacation or variation of the order if establishing the sub-tenancy claim. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 were jointly and severally ordered to pay the appellant's costs of Rs. 20,000. No action was taken against respondent No. 3. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 06 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278589