DWARKA PRASAD Vs. MOHAMMAD ZAHUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment.

(2.) The Plaintiff applied to the District Magistrate Under Sec. 3 of the UP Control of Rent and Eviction Act for permission to bring a suit against the Defendant for ejectment. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer exercising the powers of the District Magistrate rejected the application by an order dated 15-12-1952. The Plaintiff then moved the Commissioner in revision Under Sec. 3(2) of the Act. The Additional Commissioner who heard the application passed an order dated 4-4-1953 setting aside the order of the Rent Control and Eviction Officer and granted the plain tiff permission to sue the Defendant for ejectment. The suit was contested but was decreed by the learned Munsif. On appeal the learned District Judge upheld the decision.

(3.) The only contention urged in this appeal is that the suit has not been instituted with the permission of the District Magistrate as required by Sec. 3 of the UP Control of Rent and Eviction Act as the said Act does not empower the Commissioner to grant any permission to a landlord to eject a tenant. The only question therefore is whether the Commissioner has powers Under Sec. 3 of the UP Control of Rent and Eviction Act to grant permission to a landlord to eject a tenant when such permission has been refused by the District Magistrate. Subsequent amendments to Act XXIV of 1954 have clarified the position and have given the Commissioner the powers to alter or revise the order of the District Magistrate and to make such other order as may be just and proper. The relevant provisions of the statute as it stood at the time when the suit was instituted read as follows:-