JUDGMENT - SINHA D.D., J.:---Heard Mr. Chaudhary, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Manohar, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1.

Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the respondent No. 1 is the landlord of the suit premises, and filed proceedings under the provisions of Clause 13(3)(i) and (ii) of the C.P. Berar Letting of Houses Rent Control Order. The Rent Controller, vide order, dated 23-5-2000, granted permission to issue quit notice to the petitioner-tenant under Clause 13(3)(ii) and rejected the permission sought by the landlord under Clause 13(3)(i) of the Order. The petitioner challenged the said order before the respondent No. 2 Appellate Authority, who, vide order, dated 24-7-2000, allowed the appeal filed by the petitioner and set aside the permission granted by the Rent Controller under Clause 13(3)(ii) of the Order. It is further contended that the respondent-landlord filed a review petition seeking review of the order, dated 24-7-2000, which was allowed vide order, dated 26-12-2000, passed by the second respondent. Being aggrieved by the same, the present petition.

3. Mr.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document