DAYA CHAND HARDAYAL Vs. BIR CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether any and every order of the Rent Controller appointed under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, against which a party may claim to be aggrieved, would now become appealable under S. 15(2) of the said Act by virtue of Notification No. S. O./71/HA-11/73/S. 15/78. Dated 8th May, 1978, is the somewhat significant question which falls for determination in this case by the Full Bench.

(2.) Though the question aforesaid is primarily legal, yet the facts highlighting the issue deserve a somewhat detailed notice. The respondent-landlord herein had preferred a petition for ejectment under S. 13 of the Act against his tenant from a shop situated on Dev Samaj College Road. Ambala City on the ground of non-payment of rent from 1st of Sept., 1973, to the 31st of Jan., 1979 at a rate of Rs. 800 p. m. amounting to Rupees 52,000. In response thereto whilst contesting the same, the tenant admitted his liability to pa the arrears to the extent to Rs. 9,000 only at the rate of Rs. 250 p. m. The Rent Controller by his impugned order of rent claimed by the landlord at Rs. 800 p. m. and computing the same for a period of three years from January 1, 1976 to December 31, 1978, directed the payment of Rs. 28,800 at the time of the next hearing. Besides the aforesaid arrears the tenant was also directed to pay an amount of Rs. 3,456 as interest thereon and Rs. 25 as costs of the litigation.

(3.) Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Rent Controller, the petitioner-tenant herein preferred an appeal the before the Appellate Authority, i. e. the Additional District Judge Ambala. Before him a preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the landlord that no appeal was competent against a mere interlocutory order of the Rent Controller computing the rent and directing the payment of the arrears thereof on the first hearing. The stand of the petitioner- tenant before the Appellate Authority was that by virtue of the aforesaid notification dated 8th of May, 1978, any and ever order of the Rent Controller and now become appealable under S. 15 of the Act. This contention, however did not find favour with the Appellate Authority, who is a considered judgment held that no appeal by against the aforesaid order of the Rent Controller and the only remedy available to the petitioner was by way of revision.