' This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 calls in question the order of the Additional District Judge, Lahore dated 3rd of July, 1984 whereby he dismissed an appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of the Rent Controller dated 2nd of June, 1983 on the ground that it was not competent. The relevant facts are that the petitioner obtained an order of ejectment against Malik Amir Ali from a Rent Controller on 17th July, 1978. He applied for the execution of that order; during the course of which an objection petition purporting to be under Order 21, Rules 99, 100, 101 and 103 and Section 12(2) and Section 151, C.P.C. Was filed by Ch. Muhammad Latif respondent No,l. Herein. The petitioner objected to the maintainability of the objection petition but the Rent Controller after framing the preliminary objections held that the objection petition was maintainable. This order was challenged by the petitioner by filing the appeal which was dismissed as incompetent. The request of the learned counsel that the appeal be treated as revision was rejected.
3. Sh. Maqbool Ahmad II, the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the Additional District Judge has acted illegally in holding that appeal before him against the order of the Rent Controller was not competent. There is no merit in this contention of the learned counsel.
Admittedly the order dated 2nd of June, 1983 was interim in nature and the objection petition filed by respondent No,1 was yet to be disposed of. In these circumstances this order was clearly not open to appeal under the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959.
4. The next submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner was that the appeal should have been treated as revision. This contention however, overlooks the legal position that an order passed by the Rent Controller is not amenable to revision under Section 115 of the C.P.C. That being so no valid exceptions can be taken to the refusal of the Additional District Judge to treat the appeal as revision.
5. As a result of what has been stated above this petition has no force and is dismissed with no order as to costs.