JUDGMENT :

KUPPUSWAMY, J.

1. The Common question that arises for consideration in this batch of revision petitions is whether a Rent controller to whose file an application under the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease Rent and eviction) control Act (in the judgment referred to as the Act) is transferred, may act on the evidence of the parties and witnesses examined on either side of and recorded by the Rent controller from whose file the petition has been transferred or whether he should conduct an enquiry de novo.

2. In all these cases, the Rent Controller with whom the applications were filed in the first instance recorded the evidence of the witnesses which was read over to them and signed by them. Subsequently, at various stages all the cases were transferred to the file of another Rent Controller, under rule 9 of the Rules framed under the Act. Before that Controller interlocutory applications were filed Contending that he should record the evidence afresh and conduct a de novo trial. These applications were dismissed. In all the matters except in C.R.P. Nos. 125 and 2109/55 appeals were preferred against the orders of the Rent Controller to the Chief Judge, Small Causes court. Th