“23. As already mentioned earlier on the showing of the counsel for the tenants that if the Assistant Registrar was to take a decision that there was a dispute, he would have naturally gone on to decide the dispute on merit, in which event, there was an appeal provided under Section 97 itself. There can be, therefore, no finality to that decision of the Assistant Registrar. For the same reasons it must be held that even when the Assistant Registrar decides that the matter referred to him is not a dispute within the meaning of Section 91(1) no finality can be attached to such a decision. Coming back to Section 149(9) of the Act I have seen that the Tribunal is empowered to call for and examine the record of any proceeding in which an appeal lies to it, for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any decision or order passed with a power to the Tribunal to annul, modify or reverse etc. It is not disputed on behalf of the tenants that if the matter had proceeded after the Assistant Registrar had come to the conclusion that there was a dispute within the meaning of the Act, an appeal would lie to the Tribunal. The words 'any decision or order passed' can be gone into by the Tribunal in its revisional jurisdiction cannot be ignored. In my view there is no other manner of looking at the scheme and hold otherwise. As mentioned earlier there is no warrant for taking the view as canvassed by Shri Usgaonkar for the tenants. In my view, therefore, the Tribunal clearly fell in error in holding that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the revision filed by the respondents.
