BAL KISHAN JAIN Vs. SETH NAGAR MAL MODI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Smt. Ramo Devi Gupta for the petitioners and Sri P. K. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) PETITION in hand is directed against an order dated 6-2-1991 whereby the Prescribed Authority rejected the: application moved on behalf of the petitioner for issuance of commission for local inspection. The order in question being an interlocutory order, I am not inclined to interfere with it. The petitioner shall be at liberty to urge its necessity before the appellate court if an occasion arises for that in appeal against the final order of the Prescribed Authority for in the matter of issuing commission for local inspection, the powers of appellate authority are as wide as that of the Prescribed Authority. In Rent Control matters arising out of proceedings under U. P. Act 13 of 1972 it would not be a sound exercise of discretion to interfere In interlocutory matters under Article 226 of the Const, except in cases where non-interference may result in miscarriage or failure of justice. The case in hand is not a case; of that type.

(3.) HAVING considered the submissions made by Smt. Gupta, I am of the opinion that at the moment I find no justification to say anything about the aforesaid apprehension being nourished by the petitioners. Rather the apprehension seems to be imaginary one based on ignorance. However, at urged by the learned counsel, I may explain the legal position in this regard which may help dispel the petitioners.' apprehension. In cases where release of the building Is allowed in favour of landlord for the first time by the appellate court, the period prescribed for statutory determination of tenancy under section 21 (6) of the Act would begin to run from the date of appellate order and the tenant would be entitled to remain in occupation of the building, as of right, for a period of one month from the date of appellate order until the tenancy gets statutorily determined on expiry of thirty days' period from the date of the appellate order of release. There is therefore, no danger of being thrown out of the building immediately on passing of the release order by the lower appellate court in the above situation.