ORDER :- This Rule was issued by my learned brother P. N.Mookerjee J. in connection with an ejectment appeal before the special Bench of the Calcutta Court of Small Causes.It appears from unreported decision produced before me in - N.K. Dey and Sons v. Eastern Stock and Agency Ltd., Civil Revn. Case No.1749 of 1951 (Cal) (A) that P.N. Mookerjee, J. appears to be of the opinion that a revision was the proper procedure in the High Court against an appellate order of the Court of Small Causes. A Division Bench has held that a second appeal is the proper procedure. The matter is before a Full Bench. As I am a single Judge, I am bound by the Division Bench decision that the procedure will be that of a second appeal but as P.N. Mookerjee, J., admitted it as a Civil Revision I direct that this be treated as a second appeal. So long as the matter of Second Appeal and Civil Revision is not set at rest by the Full Bench it will be better to treat such Revision Application as Second appeals.

2. The main question is the question_ of condoning the delay under S.5, Act. It appears that the change introduced by the Rent Control Act in 1950 was not noticed by the Judge of the Court of the Small Cau

Click Here to Read the rest of this document