ASHISH SAHU Vs. SUSHILA DEVI CHOUHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order dated 20-11-2007 by which the rent Controlling Authority, Jabalpur rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Order 47 Rule 1, CPC. During course of the argument, learned counsel for petitioner drawn attention of this Court to the order dated 16-11-2007, a certified copy of the order is available on record, by which petitioner's application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') was rejected by the Rent Controlling authority on the ground that the provisions of Section 47 of the Code are not applicable to the Rent Controlling Authority. Against this order, petitioner filed an application under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code seeking review of the order but this application was also rejected on the ground that the Rent Controlling authority was not vested with the power of review. While hearing the matter, order dated 16-11-2007 was brought to my notice, in the interest of justice, both parties were also heard on the order passed on an application under Section 47 of the Code filed by the petitioner before the Rent Controlling Authority.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for petitioner submitted that in view of the specific provisions under Section 35 of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), the Rent Controlling Authority was having jurisdiction to decide the application filed by the petitioner under section 47 of the Code. Per contra, learned Counsel for respondent submitted that in view of Section 36 of the Act, the Rent Controlling Authority was right in rejecting the application under Section 47 of the Code on the ground that the order passed by the Rent Controlling Authority was final and no such application under Section 47 of the Code was maintainable before the authority.

(3.) TO appreciate the aforesaid contention of the parties, the question arises whether the Rent Controlling Authority was having jurisdiction to consider the application filed by the applicant under Section 47 of the Code. In this regard, relevant Sections 35 and 36 of the Act may be referred which read thus:-Section 35. Rent Controlling Authority to exercise powers of Civil court for execution of other orders.- New Section 35 has been substituted for the old one by the MPAC (Amendment) Act, 1983. Save as otherwise provided in Section 34, an order made by the rent Controlling Authority or an order passed in appeal under this chapter or in a revision under Chapter III- A shall be executable by the Rent Controlling Authority as a decree of a Civil Court and for this purpose, the Rent Controlling Authority shall have all the powers of Civil Court. Section 36. Finality of order.- Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act; every order made by the Rent Controlling authority shall, subject to decision in appeal, be final and shall not be called in question in any original suit, application or execution proceeding. Section 35 of the Act empowers the Rent Controlling Authority to exercise the power of Civil Court for execution of its order as a decree of Civil court and it is vested with all the powers of a Civil Court in this regard. So far as section 36 of the Act is concerned, it relates to finality of the order passed by the rent Controlling Authority and has no concern with the execution of the decree in respect of which a specific provision has been made in Section 35 of the Act. Section 47 of the Code provides that all questions arising between the parties to the suit in which decree was passed relating to the execution, discharge or satisfaction of the decree shall be determined by the Court executing the decree and not by a separate suit. The order of the Rent Controlling Authority, directing eviction under Chapter III- A of the Act is executable as a decree of civil Court. Before 1983, such powers were vested with the Civil Court and now by incorporation of Chapter III- A in the Act, limited power has been given to the Rent Controlling Authority to pass an order of eviction in respect of landlords defined in Section 23-J, for their bonafide necessity for residential or non-residential accommodation. If any question arises during execution proceedings between the parties or their representatives, naturally the Rent controlling Authority which is vested with the power to execute its order as a decree of Civil Court has to decide the question between the parties. Otherwise the provisions of Section 35 shall be nugatory because as soon as any such question arises between the parties, the Rent Controlling Authority will be left with no option except to dismiss the application without deciding the objection on merits.