S.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.

1. Whether the appellate authority under S.15(3) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 , has the jurisdiction to remand the whole case to the Rent Controller for decision afresh is the sole, though meaningful, question which falls for determination in these two civil revision petitions before us on a reference. Directly linked therewith is also the issue of the correctness of the view expressed first by Grover J., in Civil Revn. No. 641 of 1957 - Moti Ram V/s. Ram Sahai, decided on April 29, 1958 (Punj) and its categoric affirmance by the Division Bench in Krishan Lal Seth V/s. Shrimati Pritam Kumari, (1961) 63 Pun LR 865.

2. It is manifest that the aforesaid question is pristinely legal. Nevertheless the matrix of facts giving rise to the issue does call for notice. Raghunath Jalota petitioner instituted two separate applications for ejectment under the East Punjab Rent Restriction Act (hereinafter called the Act) - one against Labhu Ram and Ramesh Duggal respondents jointly and the other against Ramesh Duggal respondent alone with respect to the portions of a godown leased to them. Both these applications first came up before Mr. K.S. Kau