( 1 ) THESE are two petitions in revision by a landlord against two appellate judgments of the Judge of the Sixth Bench of the Court of Small Causes Calcutta, reversing in appeal an order of the First Additional Rent Controller.

( 2 ) AN application was filed before the Rent Controller by the tenant for fixation of standard rent. The premises in question, it is admitted by both parties, form part of a larger building not yet entirely constructed and those premises and the portion of the building up to now constructed were all constructed after 31-12-1949. The Rent Controller directed fixation of rent under Sections 9 (1) (e) or 9 (1) (g ). As I have already pointed out in another decision, two sub-clauses of the same section cannot be applied to the same proceeding In the proceedings it is not clear whether he actually applied Clause (e) or Clause (g) of Section 9 (1 ).

( 3 ) BOTH the landlord and tenant appealed. There were two appeals. Hence two revisions. In both the appeals the appellate Court directed that the fixation must be under Section 9 (1) (f) and remanded the case for the purpose of such fixation.

( 4 ) THE point now raised by the landlord in both