R NARAYANASWAMY Vs. P A ABDUL MAJEED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE tenant has filed the above two civil revision petitions. The first C.R.P.No.2332 of 1997 is against the order dated 24.6.1997 in M.P.No.1049 of 1996 in R.C.A.No.892 of 1996 on the file of the VIII Judge Court of Small Causes, Madras. The second C.R.P.No.2333 of 1997 is against the order passed in R.C.A.No. 892 of 1996 dated, 24.6.1997 on the file of the VIII Judge, Small Causes Court, Madras. The order passed in the main appeal is consequential. Hence if we dispose of the first civil revision petition and if the tenant succeeds in the first CRP, the second C.R.P. has to be allowed.

(2.) THE facts are as follows:

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondent, however contended that the Bench was not concerned with a case like the present one. The bench has considered that a petition under Section 11(4) in a revision petition preferred to it under Section 25 of the Act. So far as this case is concerned, it relates to only an appeal preferred before the Appellate Authority. Therefore the said case is only an arbitor.