JAGDISH PARSHAD Vs. MEHAR CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenant's revision directed against the order of the Appellate Authority dismissing his application for the review of order dated 29-9-1981. Petitioner is tenant under respondent. He filed petition under Section 10 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act claiming that certain amenities are being enjoyed by him and the landlord is trying to interfere in the same. He, therefore, prayed that the landlord be asked not to interfere in his enjoyment of these amenities.

(2.) LANDLORD contested the petition. The Rent Controller, after finding that the grouse made by the petitioner was without any basis, dismissed the application. Aggrieved against the order of the Rent Controller, petitioner filed appeal before the Appellate Authority. Before the appeal could be heard on merit, landlord admitted enjoyment of certain amenities by the tenant. Landlord also gave an undertaking that he will not interfere in any manner in the enjoyment of these amenities by the tenant; The offer made by the landlord was admitted as correct by the tenant and he consented' to the dismissal of the appeal. In consequence, appeal of the tenant was dismissed. After some time, petitioner made an application purporting to be under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 of the Civil Procedure Code. In the application, he prayed that the order dismissing the appeal, be reviewed. He also prayed that certain amenities were being enjoyed by him and, therefore, he should be allowed to enjoy those amenities. The application was contested arid on contest, the same was dismissed as the Appellate Court was of the view that it had no power to review the order. This order is being challenged in this civil revision.

(3.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find no merit in this civil revision.