AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Sathasivam, J.—The tenant is the petitioner. The Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order of the Appellate Authority dated 11.10.2002 made in unnumbered R.C.A. of 2002 in and by which, the Appellate Authority has directed the appellant (petitioner herein)/tenant to deposit the arrears of rent, failing which the appeal will be rejected.
Heard both sides.
It is seen that even before numbering the appeal, the Appellate Authority directed the appellant/tenant to deposit entire arrears as directed by this Court, failing which the appeal will be rejected. The order of the learned Appellate Authority is directly opposite to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in A. Rafeeq Ahmed & Co. etc. Vs. M/s.Montari Leather Ltd., etc. 2002 1 L.W. 133. Inasmuch as the right of appeal is recognised as a vested right and in view of the fact that the Appellate Authority even without assigning the number to the appeal filed, imposed a condition viz., depositing entire arrears, I am satisfied that the said order cannot stand even for a minute''s scrutiny.
Following the Division Bench decision, the impugned order of the Appellate Authority dated 11.10.2002 is set aside and the Appellate Authority is directed to number the appeal (R.C.A.) and deal with the same on merits.
It is made clear that if any stay petition is filed, it is for the Appellate Authority to consider and pass appropriate orders including passing conditional order depending on merits of the claim made by both parties.
With the above observation, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected C.M.P is closed.