BHANWAR LAL Vs. MITHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order of the learned Additional District Judge, Sirohi, dated 23-9-1982, whereby he allowed the preliminary objection relating to the maintainability of the appeal and dismissed the petitioner's appeal on the ground that the appeal is not maintainable under Sec. 22 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (herein-after referred to as "the Act" ).

(2.) A few material facts may be noticed. A suit for arrears of rent and ejectment was filed by Mst. Dhapu, Ashok Kumar and Mithan Lal against the defendant-petitioner in the Court of Munsif, Aburoad, on the grounds of default and reasonable bonafide need. It was alleged in the plaint that the disputed premises, namely the shop, is required for Mst. Dhapu, who will start a small 'kirana' shop. A plea was taken in written statement that the shop fell to the share of the plaintiff Mithanlal and Mithanlal is the owner of the shop since 1976. Thereafter, an application for amendment of the plaint was moved. The amendment sought was deletion of the names of Dhapu and Ashok Kumar as plaintiffs and that the shop is required for reasonable and bonafide need of Mithanlal for running a dispensary. The learned Munsif allowed the amendment on 9. 3. 1981, although the amendment application was contested by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Munsif, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Sec 22 of the Act before the learned Additional District Judge, Sirohi, and on a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the appeal, when raised before him, he up held the same and dismissed the appeal He observed that only the orders passed under the Act are appealable under Sec. 22 of the Act and he specified certain orders, namely, order under Sec. 6, 10, 13 (4), 15, 19-A, 20 etc. of the Act. Dissatisfied with the order of the learned Addl. District Judge, this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) IN the result, this revision petition has no force, so it is hereby dismissed summarily. .