( 1 ) PETITIONER carried on certain construction after sanction from Municipal Corporation D. D. A. claiming that construction was against lease terms cancelled the lease and threatened re-entry. Petitioner Sued for mandatory injunction that cancellation was wrong and threat of re-entry was illegal. D. D. A. raised preliminary objections that D. M. C. was necessary party and that suit was not maintainable without notice u/s 53-B (1) D. D. Act. Trial Court held these issues against plaintiff and he filed revision in High Court. Maintainality of revision was questioned. It was held on reliance on Sada Nand Vs. D. D. A. 1973. R. L. R. 295, that revision lies against, decision of a part of cause of action. Para 24 onwards the judgement is :-

( 2 ) IT is thus clear that even though the order directing the addition of the Corporation as a defendant to the suit was not a mere procedural order but was an order which was capable of affecting the course of the litigagation, even the outcome of it and capable of affecting the rights and obligations not only of the existing parties to the litigation but even the parties sought to be added as well and would, therefore, be amenable to