SURESH SHIVRAM CHAVAN Vs. YAMUNABAI SUKUR VAITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are the tenants of a chawl of which the respondent is the owner and, therefore, the landlady vis-a-vis the petitioners. The petitioners filed an application, being Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 236 of 1977, for fixation of standard rent on the ground that the contractual rent was excessive. In the proceedings pursuant to the application the tenants themselves had not made any application for fixation of interim rent. The respondent, however, made an application purporting to be an application under Section 11(4) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as the "the Bombay Rent Act", for fixation of interim rent till the disposal of the standard rent application filed by the petitioners. On that application the learned trial Judge fixed interim rent and directed the petitioners to go on paying the rent so fixed.

(2.) AGAINST the said order the petitioners preferred a revision application, being Civil Revision Application No. 41 of 1979, which was heard and dismissed by the learned Extra Assistant Judge of Thane by his judgment and order dated 31st July, 1980 by holding that revision application against the order passed by the learned trial Judge in the instant case did not lie.

(3.) MR . Baadkar, the learned Advocate appearing in support of the petition, has not challenged the judgment of the learned Assistant Judge wherein it has been held that a revision application does not lie against the order of the trial Court in the instant case. He, however, insists that the order passed by the learned trial Judge is liable to be set aside because it is made in erroneous exercise of the jurisdiction vested in him.