Bodhraj vs Gurcharandas

Wazir, C.J.

(1) This is a revision application by Bodh Raj landlord against an order passed by the Controller in a case pending before him. for fixation of fair

rent.

(2) An objection is taken on behalf of Gulcharan Das respondent that the revision application is not maintainable as the High Court has no power

to revise the orders passed by the Controller.

(3) Section 21 of the Houses and Shops Rent Control Act of 2009 provides that from a final order of the Controller an appeal shall lie to the

District Judge of the province in which the house or shop, in respect of which such order is made, is situate. Subsection (4) of Sec. 21 provides

that from an order made in such appeal no further appeal shall lie, but the High Court may revise the order on the ground of error of law or on the

ground of material failure of justice. Under S. 64 of the J. and K. Constitution Act read with S. 22 of the Letters Patent the High Court has power

of superintendence over Courts over which it has revisional or appellate jurisdiction. Under S. 21 of the Houses and Shops Rent Control Act,

2009, subsection (5) empowers the High Court to hear revisions from an order of the District Judge passed in appeal against the order of the

Controller. The High Court, therefore, can exercise superintendence over the Court of the Controller1 as well.

(4) The question for consideration is whether the High Court should revise an interlocutory order passed by the Controller under its power of

superintendence. The power of superintendence should be exercised very sparingly and only in those cases where a party is likely to suffer

irreparable damage in case an order of the Court is allowed to stand but in the present case there is no such danger. The order, when finally

passed, will be appealable and the aggrieved party will have a right to get any error rectified in appeal. When there is another remedy open to a

party the power of

I superintendence of the High Court cannot ordinarily be invoked.

(5) This application is, therefore dismissed with costs.

(6) M.K.S. Application dismissed.