- (1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. This writ peti tion is directed against the order of respon dent No. 2 dated 25-4-1991 whereby the revision was allowed and the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent was decreed.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that respondent No. 1 filed Suit No. 148 of 1984 against the petitioner for recovery of ar rears of rent, ejectment and damages with the allegations that the petitioner was tenant of the disputed premises at monthly rent of Rs. 25. He had also executed a rent deed on 1-11-1981. The petitioner filed written statement and denied that there was any relationship of landlord and tenant. He also denied that he ever ex ecuted a rent-deed. The trial Court dis missed the suit on the finding that the plaintiff failed to prove that there was any relationship of landlord and tenant. The plaintiff- respondent filed revision against the said order. Respondent No. 2 has al lowed the revision by the impugned order. Sri Tarun Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that the revisional Court was not justified in setting aside the findings on the question of relationship of landlord and tenant. In Laxrni Kishore and others v. Har Prasad Shukla, 1979 ACJ 473, it has been held that the revisional Court on coming to the con clusion that there was any misreading of evidence or there was any error of facts in the order passed by the Judge Small Causes Court can remand the matter to the trial Court for decision afresh in the mai ler. The trial Court had not accepted the rent-deed as a genuine document. The revisinal Court had observed that the find ing given by the trial Court was against the evidence on the record. As stated above the revisional Court should have remanded the matter. In view of the writ petition is al lowed. The Judge Small Causes Court is directed to decide the case afresh in accordance with law and also consider the documents which have been referred to by the revisional Court in its order. As the case is very old the trial Court shall decide the suit within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
(3.) THE parties shall bear their own costs. Petition allowed. .;