- (1.) This is a Defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for possession over a shop in the city of Saharanpur and for arrears of rent. There is no dispute about the rent now and the only question that has survived and come up for decision relates to the decree of ejectment passed by the trial court and affirmed by the lower appellate court.
(2.) It appears that the permission taken Under Section 3 of the UP Control of Rent and Eviction Act was granted by the Addl. Distt. Magistrate of Saharanpur. The Defendant challenged the propriety of this permission by filing a revision application before the Distt. Magistrate of Saharanpur who declined to interfere.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the Appellant contends that the permission relied upon by the Plaintiff is not valid, for it was not granted by the Distt. Magistrate but by an officer to whom the Distt. Magistrate had not given the full authority required by law to be given. The relevant portion of the order passed by the Distt. Magistrate, Saharanpur reads as follows: In supersession of all previous orders on the subject I, R.P. Sahai, Distt. Magistrate of Saharanpur make the following order under the UP (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act (III) of 1947 as amended by Act XLIV of 1944...while retaining to myself the powers to revise any order passed by my nominees, if necessary, I nominate the following officers Under Section 2(4) of the Act and authorise them to exercise powers under the provision of the various sections of the Act in the area of Saharanpur Distt. as noted against them below: (a) to grant permission to sue in the civil court for eviction of tenant from any accommodation Under Section 3 of the Act: Sub-Divisional Officer, Roorkee, for the whole sub-division and Addl. Distt. Magistrate for the rest of the district.;