( 1 ) THIS petition under Article 227 of the Constitution really calls for understanding the true scope, extent and meaning of the judgment of the Supreme Court in S. B. Noronah v. Prem Kumari Khanna, XVI (1979) D. L. T. 116 (S. G.) wherein the Supreme Court has interpreted Section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" ). It also, in the light of the said judgment, calls for understanding the scope of the Powers of the Rent Controller when application is filed before him for possession, after sanction granted under the said section for creating a tenancy for a limited period has expired.

( 2 ) THE petition itself is directed against a seemingly innocuous order of the learned Rent Controller dated 16-11-1981 which reads as under :

"in view of the Authority of A. I. R. 1980 Page 193, the allegation of the respondent requires trial. Learned counsel for the petitioner has cited the authority of 1981 (2) P. L. R. 103 but in this case alle- gations of fraud are there. Put up for evidence of the objector-respondent on 15-1-82. "

( 3 ) HOWEVER, before I discuss the scope of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court and the powers of the