Majority: (Natarajan J. For himself and Mukharji J.)

1. These appeals by special leave and the special leave petition have been clubbed together and listed for consideration of a common question of law involved in them, viz, whether against an order of a Court in revision under S.20 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent) Control Act, 2 of 1965 (for short the Kerala Act), a further revision would lie to the High Court under S.115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2. Though the question is not res integra in view of the decision of this Court in Aundal Ammal v. Sadasivan Pillai 1987 (1) KLT 53: 1987 (1) SCC 133: AIR 1987 SC 203), the appeals have been listed for consideration by a Bench of three judges of the very same question in order to see whether there is any conflict between the views taken in Aundal Ammal's case (Supra) and a later decision of this Court in Shyamaraju Hegde v. U. Venkatesha Bhat and ors. (1987 (2) KLT 977: 1987 (3) J.T. 663) and whether the view taken in the earlier case requires reconsideration.

3. Even at the threshold of the judgment it has to be mentioned that Aundal Ammal's case arose under the Kerala Act whereas Shyamaraju Hegde's case (supra) p