SHAFI-UR-REHMAN, J.-This app.-al under section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance calls in question an order in limine dismissing appellant's constitutional petition on 23-2-1977.
2. The appellant is the landlady who procured an order of ejectment against her tenant ex parte on the ground that she required the premises for her personal occupation. Later the Rent Controller set aside the ex parte proceedings on the ground that a reasonable opportunity of hearing was more appropriate to the proceedings against the tenant.
3. The learned Judge in Chambers has held that the order complained of was not final, and that against the final order if and when passed the appellant had statutory remedy adequate in all respects and even the impugned order could then be reviewed.
4. The appellant's case is that the Rent Controller's order, dated 16-7-1976 was never attacked and remained intact, that service had been taken to have been properly effected on him, that even possession had beets obtained in ex parse execution .Proceedings and in these circumstance there was no question of a jurisdiction available to the Rent Controller to be exercised.
5. We are not impressed by these submissions. The learned Rent Controller had come to the conclusion that in the circumstances of the case, it was necessary to associate the respondent- tenant, in the proceedings. This conclusion of the Rent Controller as well as the circumstances in which it was reached will be open to review on grounds of fact and law, if and when appeal against the final order is preferred. We would not, like the learned Judge in Chambers, endorse interference at this intermediary stage of the proceedings and would rather prefer an adjudication on merit than on technicalities which too in their own domain, and at proper time are reviewable. The appeal is therefore dismissed in limine.