Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 3398 (MAD)

E. M. Mohammed Raffique v. K. Rajram Reddiar

2012-08-01

G.RAJASURIA

body2012
Judgment :- 1. Animadverting upon the order dated 05.04.2012 passed in E.A.No.16 of 2012 in E.P.No.15 of 2010 in HRCOP No.65 of 2008 by the Rent Controller at Pondicherry, this civil revision petition is focussed. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner who would submit that this is an order passed in E.A. in E.P. in connection with the Rent Control matter and hence this revision. 3. I would like to refer to Sections 18 and 25 of the of the Pondicherry Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1969, which are extracted hereunder: "Execution of orders 18. Every order made under Sections 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 and every order passed on appeal under section 23 or on revisions under section 25 shall be executed by the Munsif having jurisdiction over the area in which the building is situated and if there are more than one such Munsif by the Principal Munsif as it it were a decree passed by him: Provided that an order passed in execution under this section shall not be subject to an appeal, but shall be subject to revision under section 25. Revision 25. Revision.- (1) The High Court may, on the application of any person aggrieved by an order of the appellate authority, call for and examine the record of the appellate authority, to satisfy itself as to the regularity of such proceeding or the correctness, legality or propriety of any decision or order passed therein and if, in any case, it appears to the High Court that any such decisions or order should be modified, annulled, reversed or remitted for reconsideration, it may pass orders accordingly. (2) Every application to the High Court for the exercise of its power under sub-section (1) shall be preferred within one month from the date on which the order or proceeding to which the application relates is communicated to the applicant: Provided that the High Court, may in its discretion, allow further time not exceeding one month for the filing of any such application, if it is satisfied that the applicant had sufficient cause for not preferring the application within the time specified in this subsection." 4. As against any order passed by the Executing Court relating to Rent Control matter, only revision would lie under Section 25 of the said Act and not under Section 115 of CPC. As against any order passed by the Executing Court relating to Rent Control matter, only revision would lie under Section 25 of the said Act and not under Section 115 of CPC. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is not maintainable and it is ordered to be returned. However, it is open for the petitioner to make necessary changes in the revision petition as per Section 25 of the Pondicherry Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1969 and re-present it. Registry is directed to return the papers.