JUDGMENT - DHABE H.W., J.:—Parties by Counsel. Rule. Heard forthwith.

2. The principal question urged in the instant L.P.A. is whether the Additional Collector has jurisdiction to decide the appeal preferred under Clause 21(1) of the C. P. and Berar Letting of Premises and Rent Control Order, 1949 (for short “the Rent Control Order”).

3. Briefly the facts relevant for determination of the above question are that the respondent No. 1 who is the landlord of the suit premises of which the appellant is a tenant filed an application before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Amravati and the Rent Controller, Badnera (for short “the Rent Controller”) under Clause 13(3)(ii), (v), (vi) and (vii) of the Rent Control Order seeking permission to terminate the tenancy of the appellant. The learned Rent Controller, by his order dated 22-3-1989, rejected the application of the respondent No.1 for permission under Clause 13(3)(ii), (v) and (vii) of the Rent Control Order but granted him permission under Clause 13(3)(vi) of the said Order only. Feeling aggrieved, both the parties filed appeals under Clause 21 of the Rent Control Order. The learned Appellate Authority maintained the permission granted by th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document