JAI PRAKASH Vs. JEAN CONEA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question for decision is : What is the period of limitation for filing a petition under Section 25-B (8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The petitioners-landlords filed an application for eviction of the respondent under Section 14 (1) (e) rsad with Section 25-B of the Act which was dismissed by the Controller on 29th April, 1978. An appeal filed before the Rent Control Tribunal on 3rd July, 1978 was dismissed on 10th January, 1980 on the ground that no appeal was maintainable under Section 25-B (8) of the Act. The petitioners applied for certified copy of the Controller's order on 11th January, 1980 and it was ready on 27th February, 1980. The present revision petition under Section 25-B (8) of the Act was filed on 17th May, 1980. An application C.M. No. 1724 of 1980) was also filed by the petitioners under Sections 5 and 14 of the Limitation Act praying that the time spent for prosecuting the appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal be excluded and the delay in filing the revision be condoned.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that no period of limitation is prescribed for filing the revision petition under Section 25-B (8) of the Act in any of the Articles of the Limitation Act or anywhere else and as such he submits that Article 137 of the Limitation Act is applicable and therefore the present petition is within time. In the alternative he submits that the delay in filing the revision petition be condoned. Learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand submits that the period of limitation for the exercise of revisional powers by a Civil Court is 90 days from the date of the order under Article 131 of the Limitation Act.

(3.) Rule 23 of the Delhi Rent Control Rules, 1959 provides that in deciding any question relating to procedure not specially provided by the Act and these rules, the Controller and the Rent Control Tribunal shall as far as possible be guided by the provisions contained in the CPC. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that as the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable to the proceedings under the Rent Control Act, the present petition is deemed to have been filed under CPC. Section 25-B (8) of the Act reads : 25-B (8) : No appeal or second appeal shall lie against an order for the recovery of possession of any premises made by the Controller in accordance with the procedure specified in this section ; Provided that the High Court may, for the purpose of satisfying itself that an order made by the Controller under this Section is according to law call for the records of the case and pass such order in respect thereto as it thinks fit."