1. ' TUFAIL H. EBRAHIM, J.--- The brief facts for disposal of the above Reference are that the plaintiff and defendants were doing partnership business under the name and style of Civil Hospital Chemists in a rented shop situated within the premises Civil Hospital, Karachi (hereinafter referred to as the "shop premises"), which shop premises is owned by Government of Sindh and managed and controlled through Medical Superintendent Civil Hospital, Karachi. The plaintiff had filed the suit for Dissolution of Partnership Firm, Rendition of Accounts and Injunction being Suit No,636 of 1985.
2. ' The Official Assignee was appointed as Receiver in the said suit vide order dated 18-11-1999. During the proceedings shop premises was demolished and bids were invited for reconstruction of the shop from various contractors during the pendency of this suit but for various reasons the same had not been approved and construction work had not been commenced.
3. ' Official Assignee has received notice dated 12-9-2009 from the legal counsel of Medical Superintendent of Civil Hospital, Karachi for termination of lease and handing-over possession of the premises in question on 30-9-2009. A statement dated 14-9-2009 was also filed in the Court by the learned counsel of the Medical Superintendent of Civil Hospital, Karachi, along with the copy of the said notice of termination of tenancy in respect of the shop premises. That in pursuant to the statement the proposed construction work was suspended vide order dated 15-10-2009. The matter relating to termination of tenancy was partly heard on 10-11-2009 and 24-11-2009 on which date Mr. Ikram Ahmed Ansari Advocate was appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court. That the Official Assignee has also filed Reference No,9 dated 27-10-2009 incorporating in detail all the facts of the case.
4. ' This matter was finally heard on 22-12-2009 on which date all the parties present were heard. It has been contended by the learned counsel of the Medical Superintendent of Civil Hospital, Karachi that there is no written tenancy agreement between the owner/landlord/lessor and the tenant/lessee in respect of the shop premises and, therefore, the relationship between them should be governed by Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and not by Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as the "Ordinance"). He has further argued that in terms of section 5(1) of the Ordinance, it is necessary that agreement by which a landlord lets out any premises to a tenant shall be in writing and if such agreement is not compulsorily registerable under any law for the time being in force, it shall be attested by, signed by, and sealed with the seal of the Controller within whose jurisdiction the premises is situated or any Civil Judge or First Class Magistrate. He has emphasized that there is no written agreement and, therefore, the Ordinance shall not be applicable. The learned counsel of the Medical Superintendent of Civil Hospital, Karachi, has further contended that the shop premises is owned by the Government of Sindh, therefore, the provisions of the Ordinance shall not be applicable in the present case as section 3(1) of the Ordinance stipulates that this Ordinance will be applicable to all premises other than which are owned or requisitioned under any law by or on behalf of the Federal Government or Provincial Government.
5. ' The learned counsel of Medical Superintendent of Civil Hospital, Karachi has vehemently argued that in terms of section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, the lease of the immovable property for the purposes of other than agricultural purposes is to be deemed to be lease from month to month and the same is terminable on the part of either lessor or lessee by 15 days' notice expiring with the end of the month of the tenancy. Learned counsel has submitted that notice under this section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 has been served upon the Official Assignee Karachi who has been appointed as the Receiver in respect of shop premises by virtue of order dated 18-11-1991 and since there is no dispute as to the title of the shop premises, therefore, the Receiver, being an officet of this Court should abide by the law and handover possession of the shop premises to the owner/ landlord/lessor. The learned counsel has pleaded that on the appointment of the receiver, the shop premises has come into the possession of the Court and this Court not permit the Receiver to hold over the shop premises, as in the case of holding over then this Court will have to give permission to the owner/lessor/landlord to institute suit for possession against the Receiver which would be undesirable, embarrassing and expensive as in fact it would lead to granting of permission to institute a suit against the Court who had appointed the Receiver.
6. ' The learned Official Assignee as the Receiver in this matter vide Reference No,9 of 2009 has prima facie opposed the contention put forward on behalf of Medical Superintendent of Civil Hospital, Karachi on the grounds that rent in respect of the premises was increased from Rs,500 per month to Rs,5000 per month vide order dated 16-5-2008 and permission was also granted for making necessary repairs to the premises from the Medical Superintendent of Civil Hospital vide letter dated 13-3-2006 and thereafter bids were invited from the various contractors/builders for reconstruction of the shop premises. He has stated that notice dated 12-9-2009 terminating the lease in respect of the shop premises is contrary to the law and fact however he has not specifically admitted that the Ordinance is not applicable in the given case and section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 is applicable.
7. ' The learned counsel for the plaintiff and defendants have argued that the Official Assignee has been appointed as Receiver at the instance of the parties in the suit and the Receiver being Officer of the Court holds said property for the ultimate benefit of the parties to the suit and in such circumstances the Receiver has no authority to surrender valuable tenancy rights and this Court should not direct the Receiver to hand over possession to the owner/landlord/lessor and if deem fit may in the given circumstances grant permission to the owner/landlord/lessor to institute suit against the Receiver. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has argued that the Receiver has no authority to handover possession of the suit property (a) without permission of the Court and (b) without legally defending the rights of the parties to the suit.
8. ' Learned counsel Mr. Munir-ur-Rehman has further argued that heavens would not fall if permission is granted by this Court to file suit against the Receiver appointed by this Court. He has contended that the suit will not be against an officer of the Court or personally against the Receiver, but the same shall be defended by the Receiver on behalf of the parties (tenants). In support of his submissions he has placed the `Mowing case-law:--- ' (1) AIR 1940 Ca1.429, (2) AIR 1940 Cal. 402, (3) AIR 1936 Sindh 122 and (4) AIR 1940 Cal.
9. 1.
10. ' The cases cited by the learned counsel are not relevant to the present controversy and are distinguishable. However, there is no cavil to the proposition that the Receiver is an officer of the Court and is appointed for the benefit of all the parties interested in the 'litigation in which he is appointed. The Receiver has no personal rights in the property, nor can he take action of any sort without the sanction of the Court, however the Receiver in some instances with the sanction of the Court can sue or be sued and the suit should not be considered personally against the Receiver or the Court.
11. ' Learned Amicus Curiae Mr. Ikram Ahmed Ansari, Advocate has submitted that the Medical Superintendent of Civil Hospital, Karachi has rightfully issued notice for termination of lease under the provision of section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, since in the given circumstances the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 shall not be applicable as the shop premises is owned by the Government of Sindh. He has further stated tint since there is no dispute as to the ownership of the shop premises, therefore, after expiry of the statutory period of 15 days as mentioned in the said notice, the Official Assignee being the officer of the Court and in possession of the shop premises is obliged under the law to deliver the possession of the shop premises to the rightful owner/landlord to avoid any unnecessary legal proceedings against the Receiver who being an officer of this Court.
12. 'From the facts of the case and arguments forwarded by the learned counsel for the parties, I have come to the conclusion that under Order XL, C.P.C., a Receiver is an Officer or Representative of the Court and he functions under the direction of the Court. The Receiver has no independent title to the property when he was appointed Receiver hold the property for the ultimate rightful owner. It is the obligation of every Court to ensure that the rightful owner is given his legitimate due and an Officer of this Court should not enter into any unnecessary litigation, taking advantage of its dominant power to hold-over the shop premises on which the parties to the suit have no claim after the cancellation notice of lease under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and thereafter to hold it despite the real owner being entitled to take possession under the law. I have also come to the conclusion that relationship between the parties shall not be governed by the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 in view of section 3(1) of the Ordinance as the shop premises is owned by the Government of Sindh and, therefore, the relationship between the parties shall be governed by Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The Medical Superintendent of Civil Hospital, Karachi has lawfully terminated the lease of the shop premises in accordance with the provision of section 106 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882, therefore, this Court will not permit the Receiver, being an Officer of this Court to hold over the shop premises or to enter into unnecessary and expensive litigation and hence the Receiver is directed to handover the vacant physical possession of the shop premises to the Medical Superintendent of Civil Hospital, Karachi within 15 days from the date hereof.