KEDARNATH Vs. UMEDILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application of one Kedar Nath under Article 227, Constitution of India. It is alleged that Umedilal filed an application under the Matsya Premises Rent Control Ordinance, 1943 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Matsya Ordinance) in the court of the Rent Controller for ejectment of the petitioner from a shop which he was occupying as a tenant. The grounds taken by Umedilal in his application were that the premises were required for the bona fide use of the landlord and that the tenant had not paid the rents for three months. On both the grounds Kedar Nath contested the petition.

(2.) THE Rent Controller after holding an inquiry allowed the petition of Umedilal on the 16th of October 1951 and ordered Kedarnath to vacate the disputed shop within one month failing which it was laid down that he would be liable to be ejected in accordance with the provisions of the law. Kedarnath filed an appeal against the order of the Rent Controller in the Court of the District Judge, Bharatpur, on the 19th of October 1951 and the Dist. Judge on the 28th of February 1952 confirmed the order of the Rent Controller and dismissed the appeal. Kedar Nath has now come to this court against the judgment of the District Judge. His main contention is that no appeal lay to the Court of the District Judge against the order of the Rent Controller and, because the District Judge had no jurisdiction to decide an appeal against the order of the Rent Controller, his decision should be quashed and the appeal should be ordered to be returned to the appellant for presentation to the proper authority.