A decree passed in a suit filed under Section 16 of the West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1950, must be regarded as a decree of a Civil Court as defined in Section 2 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and the provisions of Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which allows for appeals against orders made in execution of decrees, would apply.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by the judgment-debtor against an order made on the 12th November 1952 by a Special Bench of the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, dismissing an appeal filed before that Bench by the present appellant on the ground that no appeal lay to that Bench.

( 2 ) MR. Mukherjee who has appeared on behalf of the respondent has not raised any preliminary objection on the ground that no second appeal lies to this Court. It is therefore not necessary for us to express any opinion on this question. We are only concerned with the question whether an appeal lay to the Special Bench as prescribed by Section 32 (6) (ii) of West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act 1950 (Act XVII of 1950 ).

( 3 ) THE suit out of which the appeal arises was filed on the 9th April 1951 after the Rent Control Act of 1950 came into operation. The suit was decreed ex parte and thereupon the respondent decree-holder started proceedings in execution. As was to be expected, the appellant judgment-debtor filed objections under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure. These objections were overruled by the learned Judge, Fourth Bench, of the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta. Against that order an appeal was preferred before-the Appeal Bench as determined under Section 32 (6) (ii) of the Rent Control Act of 1950, the value of the suit being less than Rs. 5000/ -. The only question which falls to be determined in this appeal is whether that appeal was competent. The Special Bench which held that no appeal lay, did not give any reasons in support of their conclusion. They merely stated that no appeal lay to that Bench.

( 4 ) IN this Court Mr. Sett who has appeared in support of the appeal has submitted that an appeal lay under Section 32 (6) (ii) of the Rent Control Act of 1950.

( 5 ) SECTION 32 (6) (ii) does not specifically provide that an appeal lies. It merely prescribes the forum of the appeal. No doubt the implication is that an appeal lies against a decree for recovery of possession under the circumstances mentioned in that section.

( 6 ) THE answer to the enquiry as to whether an appeal lies against an order made in execution of a decree for recovery of possession passed in a suit filed in terms of Section 16 of the Rent Control Act of 1950 must be found on a consideration of other provisions of the Rent Control Act of 1950.

( 7 ) SECTION 16 of the Bent Control Act of 1950 prescribes the jurisdiction of a Court which is competent to try suits for recovery of possession in regard to premises to which the Act relates. Such suits as the Section provides, must be tried by the Courts referred to in Schedule 'b' to the Act. Schedule 'b' provides that the Courts specified therein as competent to try suits for recovery of possession, would be deemed to be Courts as defined by the Bengal, Assam and Agra Civil Courts Act (Act XII of 1887 ). In the present case the suit was filed before the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, as provided by Schedule 'b'. It was transferred by the learned Chief Judge to the Judge, Fourth Bench. In view of the provisions contained in Schedule 'b', the learned Judge, Fourth Bench, when he disposed of the suit, must be deemed to have functioned as a Court of Subordinate Judge within the meaning of Bengal, Assam and Agra Civil Courts Act (Act XII of 1887 ). Such a suit, it is conceded, has to be initiated by the presentation of a plaint. If the suit terminates in favour of the plaintiff, a decree follows. That decree is a decree of a Court as specified in Schedule 'b' of the Rent Control Act. The question is whether such a decree can be regarded as a decree of a Civil Court within the meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

( 8 ) THE Bent Control Act of 1950 does not specifically make the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure applicable to suits instituted under Section 16 of the Rent Control Act of 1950. The preamble of the Code of Civil Procedure h