LAKHI RAM Vs. SAGAR CHAND AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition of revision under Sub -section (5) of Section 15 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, directed against the appellate order of the learned District Judge, Rohtak.

(2.) THE Petitioner Lakhi Ram, who is a landlord of the suit premises, made an application for ejectment of the Respondent -tenants and actually obtained an ex parte order in his favour on 14th of April, 1961, from the Rent Controller. The Respondent -tenants moved an application for setting aside the order of ejectment on the ground that there had been some misunderstanding about the case having been adjourned to 24th of April, 1961, and not 14th of April, 1961, as in fact was the case. The Rent Controller, after framing the appropriate issues and hearing the evidence, reached the conclusion that there were no sufficient grounds for setting aside the ex parte order and dismissed the application of the tenants on 22nd of December, 1961. Aggrieved by this order the tenants preferred an appeal which was allowed by the learned District Judge, Rohtak, on 22nd of May, 1962.

(3.) IT has been pressed upon me by the learned Counsel for the Respondents that the High Court has ample power under Sub -section (5) of Section 15 of the Act to examine the record of any case to test its legality or propriety and the order of the Rent Controller could be set aside under this provision of law. After examining the finding of the Rent Controller, which in my view is based on evidence recorded by him, I do not think that there is any question of legality or propriety involved to justify interference of this Court in favour of the tenants. There is ample justification on the other hand to set aside the order of the learned District Judge on the ground that it was passed in the exercise of jurisdiction which clearly did not vest in him.