The petitioner is a landlord who filed four suits for ejecting four tenants from huts built on a piece of vacant land in Washermanpet. The tenants pleaded that they were entitled to protection under the City Tenants’ Protection Act and within one month of service of notice of the suit, filed petitions under section 9 of the City Tenants’ Protection Act for an order that the landlord be directed to sell the land to them for a price to be fixed by the Court in accordance with that section. The suits were dismissed as three months notice was not given under section 11 of the Act upholding the contentions of the tenants that they were entitled to protection. At the time the suits were dismissed, the petitions of the tenants under section 9 were pending. It was contended on behalf of the landlord that these petitions should have been merely dismissed as no order for ejectment had in fact been passed. The Registrar of the Small Cause Court has rightly in my opinion repelled this contention and held that notwithstanding the dismissal of the ejectment suits these petitions under section 9 should be enquired into and disposed of, but only one revision petition has been filed by the