( 1 ) THIS judgment will dispose of S. AO. No 1 -D and 17-D of 1966 in which common questions have been raised. The appellants are tenants against whom two separate proceedings were instituted for their ejectment on the ground of subletting or parting with possession of the premises without the written consent of the lendlord.

( 2 ) AN application dated 5th June, 1961 was made to the Rent Controller, Delhi, under 0 der 26, rule 9 and Order 39, rule 7 read with section i51 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying that a local commissioner be appointed to go to the spot and report as to who was inoccupation of the premies. The order dated 12th June, 1961 by which Mr. P Bose, Advocate, was appointed as local commissioner was passed ex- parte and is in the following ternns:

"i appoint Shri P. Bose. Advocate, as a local commissioner to go to the spot and report as to who is in occupation of the premises in question. His fee is fixed at Rs. 30. "

( 3 ) THE eviction petitions in both the cases were dismissed by the Additional Rent Controller by his orders dated 23rd January, 196) but the appeals filed against his oders were accepted by the Rent Control Trib mal and the reversal wa