Judgment

NATARAJAN, J. - These appeals by special leave and the special leave petition have been clubbed together and listed for consideration of a common question of law involved in them, viz. whether against an order of a District Court in revision under S. 20, Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent) Control Act 2 of 1965 (for short the Kerala Act), a further revision would lie to the High Court under S. 115, C.P.C.

2. Though the question is not res integra in view of the decision of this Court in Aundal Ammal v. Sadasivan Pillai (1987) 1 SCC 183, the appeals have been listed for consideration by a Bench of three Judges of the very same question in order to see whether there is any conflict between the views taken in Aundal Ammals case (supra) and a later decision of this Court in Shyamaraju Hegde v. J. Venkatesha Bhat (1987) 4 JT 663 and whether the view taken in the earlier case requires reconsideration.

3. Even at the threshold of the judgment it has to be mentioned that Aundal Ammals case arose under the Kerala Act whereas Shyamaraju Hedges case (supra) pertained to the Karnataka Rent Control Act. Since there are essential differences between the two Acts, it is necessary to set out the relevant provisions of the two Acts and the circumstances in which the decision pertaining to each Act came to be rendered by this Court.

4. As per S. 20(5) of the Kerala Act "a Rent Control Court" means a Court constituted under S. 3. Under S. 3(1) "the Government may, by Notification in the Gazette, appoint a person who is or is qualified to be appointed, a Munsif to be the Rent Control Court for such local areas as may be specified therein". Section 11 of the Act provides that a landlord can seek eviction of his tenant only by making an application to the Rent Control and it also sets out the grounds on which a landlord can seek eviction ,if his tenant. Section 18 of the Act provides for an appeal being preferred by an aggrieved person to the Appellate Authority. The relevant portions of S. 18 are as under :-

"18. Appeal :- (1)(a) The Government may, by general or special order notified in the Gazette confer on such officers and authorities not below the rank of a Subordinate Judge the powers of appellate authorities for the purposes of this Act in such areas or in such classes of cases as may be specified in the order.

(b) ................

(2) & (3) .................

Explanation .............

(4) The appellate authority shall have all the powers of the Rent Control Court including the fixing of arrears of rent.

(5) The decision of the appellate authority, and subject to such decision, an order of the Rent Control Court shall be final and shall not be liable to be called in question in any Court of law, except as provided in S. 20." (Emphasis supplied).

5. Then comes S. 20 which provides for revisions and it reads as follows :-

"20. Revision :- (1) In cases where the appellate authority empowered under S. 18 is a Subordinate Judge, the District Court, and in other cases the High Court may, at any time, on the application of any aggrieved party, call for and examine the records relating to any order passed or proceedings taken under this Act by such authority for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality, regularity or propriety of such order of proceedings and may pass such order in reference thereto as it thinks fit.

(2) The costs of and incident to all proceedings before the High Court or District Court under sub-s. (1) shall be in its discretion.

20A. Power to remand In disposing of an appeal or application for revision under this Act, the appellate authority, or the revising authority, as the case may be, may remand the case for fresh disposal according to such directions as it may give."

6. The scope and effect of S. 20(1) read with S. 18(5) of the Kerala Act came to be examined by a Full Bench of the Kerala High Court in Vareed v. Mary, AIR 1969 Ker 103. The Full Bench held that since the District Court exercising revisional powers under S.