Smt. Satya Wati Jain vs Shiv Kant Ghai and others

N.K. Kapoor, J.—This order shall dispose of Civil Revisions No. 234 and 235 of 1991 as question of law and fact involved in these petitions is the same

The Petitioner has challenged the order of the lower appellate authority on the ground that the appellate authority u/s 15 (4) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, has no jurisdiction to remand the case to the Rent Controller for fresh decision. According to the Petitioner, at best the authority can make a further enquiry as it deems fit either personally or through the Rent Controller, but all the same it has no power to set aside the order of the Rent Controller and remand the case to him for retnal/redecision The matter, in fact, is covered by two Division Bench judgments of this Court reported as Krishan Lal Seth v. Smt. Pritam Kumari (1961) 63 P.L.R. 865, Raghu Nath Jalota v. Ramesh Duggal and Anr. (1980) 1 R.C.J. 404, and latest judicial pronouncement by my brother G. R. Majithia. J., in case Smt. Sewati Devi v. Tulsi Ram (1901) 97 P.L.R. 210. The impugned order is thus legally unsustainable. Accordingly, I set aside the same and sent back the case to the lower appellate authority for a fresh decision according to law. The parties are directed to appear before the lower appellate authority on 5.8.1992.