JUDGMENT - VAZIFDAR S.J., J.: - The civil revision application impugns the order of a learned Single Judge of the Small Causes Court at Bombay, rejecting the petitioner's application for the unconditional withdrawal of R.A.E. Suit No. 503/952 of 1999 filed by it against the respondent and another defendant.

2.Mr. Jagtiani submitted that the impugned order is not capable of being revised by the Small Causes Court. The question of law that therefore falls for consideration is whether an order rejecting an application to withdraw a suit unconditionally is capable of being revised by the Small Causes Court under section 29(3) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "The Bombay Rent Act"). I have come to the conclusion that it does. A consideration of this question necessitates a consideration of a question of law of general importance. It is, whether, as contended by Mr. Jagtiani, only those orders that relate to recovery of possession, or rent or fixation of standard rent for which the Bombay Rent Act was enacted are revisable under section 29(3).

3.It is true that even assuming that the impugned order is capable of being revised

Click Here to Read the rest of this document