AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 174 wordsRajamannar, C.J.—This is an application to issue a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the appellate authority passed under Madras
ACT XV of 1946 dismissing the appeal of the petitioner. The order has not been filed, but in the affidavit it is stated to be as follows : ""Appellant
called, absent. Dismissed."" It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that though the appellant was not present either in person or by advocate, it
was incumbent on the appellate authority to have decided the appeal and the provisions of Section 12 (3) of the Act are relied on. In our opinion,
when neither the appellant nor his advocate appeared to show how the Rent Controller erred and it was not shown that the decision of the Rent
Controller was in any way erroneous, the appellate authority had no other course but to dismiss the appeal. The dismissal of the appeal in such
circumstances is nevertheless a decision of the appeal. There is no ground for interference by certiorari. The application is dismissed.