RAJ KISHAN JAIN Vs. TULSI DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Raj Krishan Jain is the owner of a double storey building bearing Municipal Numbers 4231 and 4236. This building stands on plot No.11 which is part of Kothi No. 1, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, Delhi. Each portion consists of four flats and each flat has been given on rent to a different tenant. Thus eight, tenants occupy this building. On the application of some of the tenants for fixation of standard rent under section 7-A read with Schedule IV of the Delhi and Aimer Merwara Rent Control Act, 1947, the Controller fixed the rent at Rs. 453/-for the whole building and then apportioned it between the various tenants. Dissatisfied with this order the landlord appealed to the District Judge, Delhi who dismissed it. The landlord then applied under Articles .226 and 227 of the Constitution to this Court seelang to quash the order of the District Judge. Falshaw J. treated this petition as one under Article 227 of the Constitution and dismissed it. The landlord has filed this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.

(2.) The learned counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection to this appeal and that is that the order under appeal being one under Article 227 of the Constitution in exercise of power of superintendence was not appealable. The learned counsel for the appellant in reply has urged that a Letters Patent Appeal against the order under Article 227 is competent and in any case the judgment in question was made in substance under Article 226 of the Constitution and is appealable. The learned counsel for both sides have placed their reliance on the same statutory provisions and it will be convenient to describe them before dealing with the arguments.

(3.) The High Court of Judicature at Lahore was constituted by the Letters Patent dated 21st of March, 1919. Admittedly all the provisions of that Letters Patent apply to this Court also. Clause 10 of this Letters Patents allows an appeal from a decree or order made by a Single Judge. This right can be exercised only under certain conditions. The clause also enumerates certain exceptions to this right. We are only concerned in this cases with the exception under which no appeal lies if the Single Judge has made an order "in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction or in the exercise of the power of superintendence under the provisions of section 107 of the Government of India Act." This Section 107 reads:-" Each of the High Courts has superintendence over all courts for the time being subject to its appellate jurisdiction, and may do any of the following things, that is to say,