SRINIVASAN
K. A. Syed Ali – Appellant
Versus
Saradambal – Respondent
There is no merit in this civil revision petition. It arises out of the application filed the petitioner herein to try the maintainability of the main application as a preliminary The main application R.C.O.P.No.54 of 1989 filed by the respondent is for fixation of fair at Rs.27,000 per month. That is being contested by the petitioner herein. The petitioner I.ANo.89 of 1990 for deciding the question of maintainability as a preliminary point. The Controller dismissed the application holding that the question of maintainability could gone into only in the trial after the evidence is recorded. Against that order, the petitioner filed an appeal. The appellate authority held that the appeal was not maintainable and held that the question raised by the petitioner could not be decided as a preliminary without evidence being recorded. Against the said order, the petitioner has come revision in this Court.
2. At the outset, it should be said that the appeal before the Appellate Authority was maintainable. The order of the Rent Controller dismissing I.A.No.89 of 1990 did not the rights of either parties. It merely said that the question raised by the petitioner could be gone into
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.