Judgment

KRISHNA IYER, J.:- Once the facts are stated fairly, one is left to wonder what substantial issue of law deserving of adjudication by the SC survives at all in these appeals. We may straight way proceed to state, with brevity, the case of the appellant presented for our scrutiny and make short shrift of it as it merits little more.

2. The appellant, a landlord of large building, had leased out in separate portions his building to several tenants. One of such tenants is the respondent. The former resolved to start a business in automobile spares and claimed eviction of the respondent by Rent Control proceedings, under Section 10 (3) (iii) (a) and (b) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960. The petition was resisted and the Rent Controller dismissed the petition. The appeal by the landlord failed but, in revision, the High Court chose to remand the case to the appellate authority. The litigation lengthened further because the latter, after hearing parties, remitted the whole case to the trial Court for fresh disposal in accordance with some directions and, after allowing parties to lead evidence. Instead of finishing the case at the trial