Procedural defects in rent control proceedings can justify remand where the trial process is vitiated, not the claim itself.

Procedural defects in rent control proceedings, including failure to frame issues and properly record evidence, can justify remand when they vitiate the adjudicatory process. Where the defect concerns the manner of trial rather than the maintainability of the landlord's claim, curable irregularities should not defeat substantive rights. The proper course is fresh consideration in accordance with law before the Rent Control Authority, rather than final rejection of the claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether procedural defects in rent control proceedings warranted interference with the Tribunal's order and whether the matter should be sent back for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The proceedings before the Rent Control Authority were found to be procedurally defective, as issues were not framed and evidence was not properly recorded or taken on record in the manner required under the Act, 2011. The statutory procedure under Section 10 contemplates a proper adjudicatory process, and curable procedural lapses should not defeat substantive rights. At the same time, where the defect lies in the manner of trial and not in the maintainability of the claim itself, the appropriate course is not to finally extinguish the landlord's claim, but to restore the matter for decision in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The procedural infirmities justified further adjudication, and the matter ought to proceed afresh before the Rent Control Authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Curable procedural defects should not be allowed to defeat substantive rights, and where adjudication has been vitiated by procedural irregularity, the proper course is fresh consideration in accordance with law.

---