Revisional jurisdiction under the Rent Act cannot be equated with appellate jurisdiction; it is limited to assessing legality and propriety without re-evaluating evidence.

JUDGMENT :

Vivek Singh Thakur, J.

Petitioner/tenant has filed this Revision Petition under Section 24(5) of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (herein after referred to as “the Rent Act”) against the judgment dated 19.5.2014 passed by Appellate Authority in Rent Appeal No. 24-S/13b of 2013/12, titled as Bawa Jang Bahadur Vs. D.P. Bhardwaj, whereby order dated 24.9.2012 passed by Rent Controller-2 Shimla in Rent Case No. 14/2 of 2009, titled as Baba Jang Bahadur Vs. D.P. Bhardwaj has been reversed and petitioner/tenant has been ordered to be evicted for arrears of rent of ₹48,243/- with direction that on deposit of arrears of rent within 30 days from the date of passing of order dated 19.5.2014, tenant will not be evicted from the demised premises.

2. Supreme Court in Rukmini Amma Saradamma vs. Kallyani Sulochana and others, reported in (1993) 1 SCC 499 , referring its earlier pronouncement in Rai Chand Jain vs. Chandra Kanta Khosla, (1991) 1 SCC 422, with respect to scope of revisional power under Section 20 of Kerala Rent Control Act, which is similar to H.P. Rent Act, has observed that notwithstanding the fact that Section 20 of the Act conferring revisional jurisdiction of the High Court is widely worded, such a jurisdiction cannot be converted into an appellate jurisdiction.

3. With respect to scope of jurisdiction and revisional jurisdiction and the extent of power which High Court can exercise in a Revision filed under Section 24(5) of the Rent Act, Five Judges’ Constitution Bench of Supreme Court in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited vs. Dilbahar Singh , (2014) 9 SCC 78 , has observed as under:-

“28. Before we consider the matter further to find out the scope and extent of revisional jurisdiction under the above three Rent Control Acts, a quick observation about the 'appellate jurisdiction' and 'revisional jurisdiction' is necessary. Conceptually, revisional jurisdiction is a part of appellate jurisdiction but it is not vice-versa. Both, appellate jurisdiction and revisional jurisdiction are creatures of statutes. No party to the proceeding has an inherent right of appeal or revision. An appeal is continuation of suit or original proceeding, as the case may be. The power of the appellate court is co-extensive with that of the trial court. Ordinarily, appellate jurisdiction involves re-hearing on facts and law but such jurisdiction may be limited by the statute itself that provides for appellate jurisdiction. On the other hand, revisional jurisdiction, though, is a part of appellate jurisdiction but ordinarily it cannot be equated with that of a full-fledged appeal. In other words, revision is not continuation of suit or of original proceeding. When the aid of revisional court is invoked on the revisional side, it can interfere within the permissible parameters provided in the statute. It goes without saying that if a revision is provided against an order passed by the tribunal/appellate authority, the decision of the revisional court is the operative decision in law. In our view, as regards the extent of appellate or revisional jurisdiction, much would, however, depend on the language employed by the statute conferring appellate jurisdiction and revisional jurisdiction.

29. With the above general observations, we shall now endeavour to determine the extent, scope, ambit and meaning of the terms "legality or propriety", "regularity, correctness, legality or propriety" and "legality, regularity or propriety" which are used in three Rent Control Acts under consideration.

29.1. The ordinary meaning of the word 'legality' is lawfulness. It refers to strict adherence to law, prescription, or doctrine; the quality of being legal.

29.2. The term 'propriety' means fitness; appropriateness, aptitude; suitability; appropriateness to the circumstances or condition conformity with requirement; rules or principle, rightness, correctness, justness, accuracy.

29.3. The terms 'correctness' and 'propriety' ordinarily convey th