ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the Distrit Judge, who was the appellate authority under the Bombay Rent Act, could have entertained an application for review of the earlier order passed in appeal, and allowed the same and come to a conclusion that the subsequent proceedings filed by the landlord for eviction of the tenant are barred under Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

3. The aforesaid question arises under the following circumstances. The landlord appellant filed a suit for eviction of the tenant essentially on the ground on bona fide need and sub-letting. It is, no doubt, true that in the plaint he had made some averments that the tenant had also defaulted in payment of rent but he had simultaneously further averred that the landlord is not making any claim for arrears of rent. That suit ultimately was dismissed. During the pendency of the said suit, however, the landlord had alleged to have served notice on the tenant for arrears of rent. Against the earlier dismissal of the suit while the landlord s appeal was pending before the appellate authority, he filed the present suit which was registered