DOROTHY BEALE Vs. GEORGE KURIEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition raises the oft discussed question whether the jurisdiction conferred on the authorities by a special enactment confers exclusive jurisdiction on them ousting the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts. The statute concerned is admitted by the parties to be Act XVI of 1959. The revision petitioner in this case, the landlord of the premises, was successful in getting an order for eviction of the counter petitioner from the said premises pursuant to proceedings instituted under the above Act. The counter petitioner contended before the statutory authorities that there is no letting out of any building as envisaged by the statute. It was held by the revisional authority that the letting in the case was of a building, and reversing the decision of the appellate authority, Ext. P3, the revisional authority directed eviction. The order is Ext. P4. The suit has been filed by the counter petitioner for a declaration that the orders of the appellate authority, Ext. P3, and that of the revisional authority, Ext. P4, are null and void and for the issue of an injunction restraining the revision petitioner from trying to get possession of the building.

(2.) Certain preliminary objections were raised to the maintainability of the suit and the issues 1, 3 (c) and 4 which are extracted below have been tried as preliminary issues in the case.

(3.) The court below has held in favour of the maintainability of the suit and has decided the above issues in favour of the counter petitioner.