Judgment : VINOD K. SHARMA,J. 1. The applicants / plaintiffs have filed the suit for possession and damages for use and occupation of the premises in possession of defendant nos.1, 2 and 5. 2. The case of the applicants / plaintiffs is that the original owner of the property had mortgaged the property and on failure to repay the secured loan, the mortgagee brought it for sale by auctioneer. 3. The Defendant no.10 purchased the property in auction, who, after the purchase, filed Rent Control Original Petition (RCOP) for eviction of defendant nos.1, 2 and 5, by treating them as tenants. 4. The RCOP was contested, wherein, the relationship of landlord and tenant was denied. The learned Rent Controller dismissed the petition for want of relationship of the landlord and tenants. 5. The defendant no.10, in view of the finding recorded, in one of the petition, withdrew other two petitions also. 6. The property was thereafter sold by defendant no.10 to the plaintiff, who has now filed a suit for possession and damages. 7. The suit is contested by defendant nos.1, 2 and 5, by challenging the sale by auctioneer to be not binding on their ownership rights. 8. Be that as it may, it is yet to be determined, as to what right the plaintiffs visa-a-vis defendants has. The plaintiffs have also claimed damages for use and occupation of the premises, which is yet to be determined after trial. The validity of auction in favour of defendant no.10 is also to be adjudicated in a suit filed by non applicant. 9. An Advocate receiver cannot be appointed to disturb the settled possession of the non applicant. By way of interim direction, this Court can maintain "status quo" but disputed questions are not to be decided in summary manner. The plaintiffs can always prove damages for use and occupation and recover it from defendant nos.1, 2 and 5, in the event of success in the suit. The Advocate Receiver cannot be appointed on mere asking to disturb undisputed possession. 10. No ground for appointment of Advocate Receiver is made out, in the facts and circumstances of this case. Nor any direction can be issued for recovery of rent, as rejection of rent petition shows that there is no relationship of tenant and landlord. 11. Consequently, this application, being without merit, is ordered to be dismissed. No costs.