Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : K.JAYACHANDRA REDDY, PANDURANGA RAO
S.Srinivas Rao - Appellant
Versus
High Court of A.P. - Respondent
Decided On : 08-19-88
RENT CONTROL - APPELLATE AUTHORITY - PERSONA DESIGNATA - CHIEF JUDGE, SMALL CAUSES COURT - WHETHER ACTS AS PERSONA DESIGNATA - HIGH COURT'S POWER TO TRANSFER APPEALS - VALIDITY.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, either tenants or landlords, filed petitions challenging the validity of orders passed by the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, transferring a batch of eviction appeals to the Additional Chief Judge, and also the validity of an order passed by the High Court transferring 185 Rent Appeals to the Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, referred to as the "appellate authority" in Section 20 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960, does not act as a "persona designata." The court further held that the High Court, exercising its power under Article 227 of the Constitution, can transfer appeals from the Court of the "appellate authority" to any other Court.
Issues: 1. Whether the "appellate authority" named in Section 20 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960, is intended to act as a persona designata or as a Court. 2. Whether the High Court, exercising its power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, can transfer appeals from the Court of the "appellate authority" to any other Court.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted Section 20 of the Act and concluded that the "appellate authority" referred to therein is the Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, and not a persona designata. 2. The court relied on the definition of "persona designata" provided in Osborn's Concise Law Dictionary and held that the Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, is not appointed as a "persona designata" for any particular case. 3. The court also considered the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Small Causes Courts Act, 1330 Fasli, and noted that the words "chief Judge" do not appear in the Act. The court concluded that the use of the words "chief Judge" in Section 20 of the Act is merely to describe or identify the Judge of the Small Causes Court. 4. The court further held that the High Court, exercising its power under Article 227 of the Constitution, can transfer appeals from the Court of the "appellate authority" to any other Court.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging the validity of the orders passed by the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, and the High Court. The court also directed that the Civil Revision Petitions be posted before the regular court hearing Civil Revision Petitions for being disposed of on merits.
( 1 ) A question of general importance, viz. whether "appellate authority" named in S. 20 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction ) Control Act, 1960 (Act No. XV of 1960) (hereinafter referred to as the Act") is intended to act as a persona designata or as a Court and whether the High Court exercising its power under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, can transfer the appeals from the Court of the "appellate authority" to any other Court, has arisen in these cases.
( 2 ) THE facts that give rise to these questions may be stated.
( 3 ) IN most of these cases the petitioners are either tenants or landlords. An eviction petition was filed in the Court of the Rent Controller under Sec. 10 of the Act, in one case and it was dismissed and the landlord filed an appeal in the Court of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, under S. 20 of the Act. The Chief Judge, however, transferred the batch of such appeals to the Court of the Addl. Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, exercising his administrative power. The validity of the said order is questioned in these Civil Revision Petitions. The High Court by its proceedings ROC No. 843/e1/86 dated 12-3-1986 exercising its administrative power transferred 185 Rent Appeals to the Court of the Addl. Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court. The validity of this order also is questioned by way of Writs of Mandamus to declare that the order passed by the High Court is illegal. When the matters came up before our learned brother Syed Shah Mohd. Quadri, J. he felt that the question is of general importance and should be decided by a Bench. Thus these matters came up before us :
( 4 ) THE main contention in all these matters is that under S. 20 of the Act, the appellate authority, the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court is the persona designata, that he alone is competent to hear these appeals and that the Additional Chief Judge, to whom the appeals are transferred has no jurisdiction to hear these appeals. Similarly the other contention is that the High Court exercising its powers under Art. 227 of the Constitution, cannot transfer these matters from the file of the Chief Judge, to the file of the Addl. Chief Judge, since the Addl. Chief Judge cannot hear such appeals for the same reason, viz. , that it is the Chief Judge who, as the persona designata, can alone hear the appeals.
( 5 ) WE shall now refer to Sec. 20 of the Act which is in the following terms :"sec. 20 : - Appeal -- (1) Any person aggrieved by an order passed by the Controller may, within thirty days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal in writing to the Chief Judge, Small Causes Court in the Cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad and elsewhere to the Subordinate Judge, or if there are more than one Subordinate Judge to the Prl. Subordinate Judge having original jurisdiction over the area aforesaid. "
( 6 ) A plain reading of the section makes it clear that as against the order of the Rent Controller an appeal is provided, in the cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad, to the Chief Judge, Small Causes Court and elsewhere to the Subordinate Judge, or if there are more than one Subordinate Judge, to the Principal Subordinate Judge having original jurisdiction over the area. Though in Sec. 20 the expression "chief Judge, Small Causes Court " is used, we do not find any such designation in the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Small Causes Courts Act, 1330 Fasli. In the said Act, Sec. 3 defines the "court of Small Causes" as to mean "a court established under this Act" and Sec. 4 deals with the establishment and composition of Court of Small Causes, and lays down that the Government may establish a Court of Small Causes at any place in the area to which this Act extends and define the local limits of its jurisdiction and appoint a Judge for the Court of Small Causes and if necessary, appoint additional Judge or Judges. Section 4 of the A. P. (T. A.) Small Causes Courts Act reads
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.