SATYABRATA SINHA, J.

( 1 ) INTERPRETATION of Sub-section (3) of Section 20 of the A. P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short the Act) read with Rule 11 (2) of the A. P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Rules, 1961 (for short the Rules ), falls for determination in these references:

( 2 ) SECTION 20 (3) of the Act reads:the appellate authority shall send for the records of the case from the Controller and after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard and, if necessary, after making such further inquiry as he thinks fit either personally or through the Controller, shall decide the appeal.

( 3 ) THE learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the power of the appellate Court to remand the matter to the Rent Controller, is circumscribed by reason of Sub-section (3) of Section 20 of the Act, and in support of his submission, he placed reliance upon the judgments of this Court in Ekramuddin v. Smt. Sheela Bai Ekbote, 1972 APHN 3, and Konduru Ammannachary v. Rahima Khatoon, 1984 (2) ALT 364. The learned single Judge, upon noticing a judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Munilal v. Kurva Narayana, 1988 (2) ALT 755 (DB), wherein it was held that an order of the appellate authority, remanding the matter to the lower authority, is not a void order, but one passed in irregular exercise of jurisdiction.

( 4 ) IN the aforementioned situation, the learned single Judge, referred the following two questions for an authoritative pronouncement by a Division Bench of this Court:1. Whether the appellate authority under the A. P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 has power to remand the matter to the Rent Controller? 2. If such power is exercised, whether such an order is void or voidable?

( 5 ) AN appeal being a creation of a statute, no suitor has right of appeal unless the statute provides therefor. The power and jurisdiction of the appellate Court may be limited by the Legislature. Normally, the powers conferred upon the appellate Court are specifically stated in the statute. In this context, we may refer to the provisions of Section 107 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for short the Code ) which confers the following powers upon the appellate Court:powers of Appellate Court :--- (1) Subject to such conditions and limitations as may be prescribed, an Appellate Court shall have power-- (a) to determine a case finally; (b) to remand a case; (c) to frame issues and refer them for trial; (d) to take additional evidence or to require such evidence to be taken. (2) Subject as aforesaid, the appellate Court shall have the same powers and shall perform as nearly as may be the same duties as are conferred and imposed by this Code on Courts of original jurisdiction in respect of suits instituted therein.

( 6 ) A reading of the above provision shows that under Clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section 107 of the Code, the appellate Court is conferred with a power to remand a case. However, such power of the appellate Court to remand a case is restricted by reason of Order XLI, Rules, 23, 23-A and 25 of the Code. Despite the same, several High Courts held that the appellate Court has the inherent power of remand even though if the matter is not covered either under Order XLI, Rules, 23, 23-A and 25 of the Code.

( 7 ) SECTION 30 of the Act, confers power upon the Government to make rules to carry out the purpose of the Act. The Government, in exercise of such power conferred upon it, framed rules in G. O. Ms. No. 547, GA (Accommodation-B), dated 29-4-1961, known as the A. P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Rules, 1961. Rule 11 (2), which is relevant for the purpose, reads: If the appellate authority decides to make further inquiry, he may take additional evidence or require such evidence to be taken by the Controller.

( 8 ) IT is now well settled law that the provisions of the Act must be considered having regard to the text and context

Click Here to Read the rest of this document