HARBANS LAL Vs. SHAM DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order of the appellate authority, Gurdaspur dated April 2, 1989, whereby the order of the Rent Controller dismissing the ejectment application was set aside and the case was remanded for recording findings on issues No. 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8 on the evidence already on record, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appellate authority had no jurisdiction to remand the case after setting aside the order of the Rent Controller. At the most a report could be sent for from the Rent Controller and then the appeal could be decided on merits in accordance with law. In support of the contention reliance was placed on Krishan Lal Seth v. Pritam Kumari, 1961 Punjab Law Reporter 865, wherein it has been held that when the appellate authority is somehow or other dissatisfied with the trial of an application for eviction of the tenant, it can make a further enquiry as it thinks fit either personally or through the Rent Controller, but it has no power to set aside an order of the Rent Controller and remand such an application to him for retrial and re-decision.