U AHMED Vs. Y C SARASWATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is against an order dated 29-8-1997 which reads as follows: "objections filed-Heard and application is allowed for the reasons mentioned in the application. For evidence by 15. 9".

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that the order is not a speaking order, that none of the objections raised by the revision petitioner has been considered by the Court and the order therefore is liable to be set aside. The respondent is stated to have filed two petitions for eviction against the petitioner and another in respect of different portion of the same property. The revision petitioner opposed the application on various grounds.

(3.) THE respondent's Counsel sought to support the order on the ground that the consolidation of cases for purpose of disposal by common order on the ground that the evidence of the landlord is common for both. In G. Vasudeva Murthy v Y. Narasimhachar and Another, Naray-ana Pai, J. , (as he then was) has observed as follows: