Judgment :- 1. The only question in this civil miscellaneous second appeal is whether the respondent is entitled to recovery of possession. It is strenuously contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that once delivery of possession had been taken by the auction purchaser, notwithstanding the order of the High Court enabling him to recover possession according to law, it will not enable him to file a second application for re-delivery, and the remedy of the respondent would be by a separate suit. In support of this submission reliance is placed on Shaw Bux v. Bengal Breweries Ld. A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 137. I am afraid this argument overlooks the very order of the High Court wherein it was said that the rights of the auction purchaser will be safeguarded by allowing the appellants to be in possesion by directing them to pay the income of the properties and this was without prejudice to the auction purchasers right to recover possession of the properties and mesne profits according to law. From this it is clear that the auction-purchaser was enabled to seek recovery of possession. On the showing of the appellants themselves, it is found that throughout they were in possession. Therefore, even construing this as an application for mere delivery of possession, I can see no valid objection to the execution proceedings. In this view, Shaw Bux v. Bengal Breweries Ld. A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 137 has no application. Thus, I see no merits in this civil miscellaneous second appeal. Hence the civil miscellaneous second appeal stands dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs. No leave.