SANJIB BANERJEE,J. - (1.) The application is by a successful purchaser at a court sale which has invoked Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code to obtain possession of the land that was sold by this Court in its favour in the year 1996.
(2.) The sale was on "as is where is basis." The petitioner says that despite the sale being on "as is where is basis" there was only a solitary furniture shop in the one-bigha plot and, subsequently, the owner of the furniture shop also abandoned the same. The petitioner says that joint receivers were appointed over the property and continued to be in possession thereof. The contention is that no person who was not in possession of any part of the property prior to the joint receivers being appointed could have legally asserted a toehold in the property during the joint receivers' possession thereof.
(3.) Following the sale in favour of the petitioner herein, the petitioner attempted to obtain possession of the property. The Court was obliged to make over possession on "as is where is basis" since the sale was conducted on such understanding. By an order dated March 10, 2000 on the petitioner's application, a direction was issued by the interlocutory court for the joint receivers and officers-in-charge of Tollygunge police station and Regent Park police station to deliver possession of premises no. 12, Mahendra Nath Sen Lane, Tollygunge to the petitioner "by removing the obstruction created by the persons named in paragraph 20 of the petition by breaking and removing the wall raised on the passage to the aforesaid premises from Mahendra Nath Sen Lane and further ensuring that the petitioner's ingress and egress to and from the said premises is not disturbed in future.";