( 1 ) THIS is a revision under S. 25-B (8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, intituled by the petitioner to challenge the eviction order passed by Shrimati Manju Goel, 4th Additional Rent Controller Delhi under S. 14 (1) (e) of the said Act. The facts of the case show that the respondent mentioned in the eviction application had applied for leave to defend under deprocedure prescribed by S. 25-B within the time mentioned in the summons, but leave to defend was refused on two grounds.

( 2 ) FIRSTLY, the application was accompanied by the short affidavit stat ing "that the contents of the accompanying application for leave to defend of paras 1 to 5 are true to my knowledge and the same may be read as part of this affidavit", but the learned Additional Rent Controller thought that the paragraphs themselves must be reproduced in the affidavit. Secondly even on the merits and the facts stated in the application, the learned 4th Additional Rent Controller came to the conclusion that no facts were stated which entitled the tenant to leave to defend.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the respondent has attacked the order of the Additional Rent Control on both points. He says tha