Gokal Chand Mital, J.

1. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at length and on perusal of the record of the executing court as also of the Rent Controller, who passed ex-parte ejectment order against the petitioner I am of the opinion that it is a fit case in which suo motu power of revision deserves to be exercised in the ends of justice. section 15(5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter called the Act) empowers this Court to revise an order of ejectment passed under the Act, after examining the records. When the case was initially heard at motion hearing on 11th March, 1981, even at that time it appeared to me that the order of ejectment passed against the petitioner might be erroneous and that is why not only the records of the proceedings for setting aside the ex-parte ejectment order were sent for but the record of the Rent Controller who passed the ejectment order was also sent for. On 23rd of April, 1981 both the parties were represented before me and the case was adjourned to await the records. Finally, the case was taken up on 23rd of July, 1981, and after the parties were heard at length, I decided to issue notice to the r