BANARSI DASS Vs. JEETO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition filed by Banarsi Dass is directed against the judgment of the learned Appellate Authority, Jalandhar dated 20.10.1997. By virtue of the impugned judgment, the learned Appellate Authority framed an additional issue and remanded the matter to the Rent Controller, Jalandhar under Order 41, Rule 23-A Code of Civil Procedure. The parties were directed to be given reasonable opportunity to lead the evidence and in this manner the appeal was allowed. The only question agitated was that the learned Appellate Authority was in error in allowing the appeal and remanding the case of the Rent Controller and that it was in violation of Section 15(3) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short 'the Act').

(2.) SOME of the relevant facts would precipitate the question in controversy mentioned above. Banarsi Dass petitioner had filed an eviction application against the respondent. The respondent had contested the same. The learned Rent Controller, Jalandhar had allowed the application. An order of ejectment was passed with respect to the property in dispute. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent preferred an appeal with the Appellate Authority, Jalandhar. The learned Appellate Authority allowed the appeal and framed an additional issue and thereupon remanded the same to the learned Rent Controller. The operative part of the order of the Appellate Authority reads :-

(3.) THIS question has been considered by this Court more often than once. In the case of Shri Krishan Lal Seth v. Shrimati Pritam Kumari, 1961 Punjab Law Reporter 865 a Division Bench of this Court while considering sub-section (3) of Section 15 held :-