Varghese Kalliath, J.

A question relating to jurisdiction of Additional District Judges to act as appellate authority under S.18 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act) has been raised in this case. Certainly, the question has got pragmatic overtones apropos the practice of the courts in the matter of entertaining appeals under the Act. Learned counsel on both sides argued the case very elaborately, highlighting all the shades of the question from different angles.

2. The Civil Revision Petition is against an order passed by the Additional District Judge acting as appellate authority under the Act. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the Additional District Judges have no jurisdiction to exercise the power under S.18 of the Act and so on that ground, the order is liable to be set aside. He submitted that on merits also, he has got a good case. We feel that the question of merits of the revision against the order impugned, can be considered after considering the question of jurisdiction.

3. Whenever a question of jurisdiction regarding a tribunal or court is challenged, a deep study of the matter is required. In this case, learned counsel submits that the jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against the order of the Rent Control Court is confined to the Principal District Judges and that Additional District Judges have no jurisdiction at all. To resolve this question, naturally we have to investigate first the power source. Deep investigation on this aspect is not necessary, it is easy. The power source is S.18 of the Act read with the notification issued under that provision. S.18 of the Act reads thus:-

"18. appeal:-(i)(a) The Government may, by general or special order notified in the Gazette, confer on such officers and authorities not below the rank of a Subordinate Judge the powers of appellate authorities for the purposes of this Act in such areas or in such classes of cases as may be specified in the order.

(b) Any person aggrieved by an order passed by the Rent Control Court, may, within thirty days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal in writing to the appellate authority having jurisdiction. In computing the thirty days aforesaid, the time taken to obtain a certified copy of the order appealed against shall be excluded.

(2) On such appeal being preferred, the appellate authority may order stay of further proceedings in the matter pending decision on the appeal.

(3) The appellate authority shall send for the records of the case from the Rent Control Court and after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard and, if necessary, after making such further inquiry as it thinks fit either directly or through the Rent Control Court, shall decide the appeal.

Explanation: - The appellate authority may, while confirming the order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court, grant an extension of time to the tenant for putting the landlord in possession of the building.

(4) The appellate authority shall have all the powers of the Rent Control Court including the fixing of arrears of rent.

(5) The decision of the appellate authority, and subject to such decision, an order of the Rent Control Court shall be final and shall not be liable to be called in question in any Court of law, except as provided in S.20".

The relevant notification is the latest notification under S.18 of the Act issued on 31-8-1989. It reads thus:-"S.R.O. No. 1631/89: --In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-sector.(1) of S.18 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (2 of 1965) and in supersession of all previous notifications on the subject, the Government of Kerala hereby confer on the District Judges having jurisdiction over the areas within which the provisions of the said Act have been extended, the powers of the appellate Authorities for the purposes of the said Act, in the said areas".

4. S.18(1) of the Act authorises to confer