- (1.) The petitioner filed an appeal against the order of ejectment passed by the Rent Controller against him, before the Appellant Authority. In the miscellaneous application filed for stay, the Appellate Authority passed the following order :- "Heard and gone through the record. I see no grounds for granting stay. Hence the request is accordingly declined." The present petition has been filed against the aforesaid order.
(2.) The only contention raised before me by Mr. Raipuri, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that the Appellate Authority has not applied its mind to the facts of the case, that a cryptic order has been passed without specifying the reasons which weighed with the Appellate Authority for refusing to grant stay, and that for these reasons the impugned order cannot legally be sustained.
(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that there is considerable force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The appeal against ejectment order is pending decision before the Appellate Authority. In the impugned order, no reason has been given as to why the stay has been refused. In case the appeal succeeds then the petitioner would be entitled to get back possession from the respondent if he obtains possession on the basis of the ejectment order passed in his favour by the Rent Controller. Such kind of situation is likely to create lot of complications. In the ordinary course, I would not have interfered with the order of the Appellate Authority, but as earlier observed, the impugned order does not give any reason as to why stay was refused and in this situation, I have no other alternative but to set aside the same.;