IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.979 of 2008 RAJDEO RAI Versus YOGENDRA SAH ----------- 3 02.12.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the opposite party. A very simple issue is involved in this case. The petitioner-plaintiff-landlord who has brought a suit for eviction against the defendant-opposite party in the year 2006, had filed an application under Section 15 of the B.B.C. Act claiming rent from the date of institution of the suit. The Court below unfortunately, has not examined the matter in its true perspective and somehow has taken a view which cannot be supported in law. It is the finding of the Court below that such application under Section 15 of the B.B.C. Act will not be maintainable because there is no averment in the plaint that the demand for payment of rent was ever made by the petitioner. Unfortunately, that is not the requirement of Section 15 of the B.B.C. Act. The admitted fact is and the same also gets clarified and confirmed from the counter affidavit filed by the defendant-opposite party-the tenant that not a single paise of rent had been paid by him after institution of suit either to the petitioner or to any other person. The - 2 - last payment shown therein is in the month of November, 2006 and on that basis it is being claimed that certain amount in excess had already been paid and therefore, the prayer for payment of the petitioner-landlord for being paid rent in terms of Section 15 of the B.B.C. Act , could not have been gone into into and decided in favour of the petitioner. As the Court below has not gone into this issue of adjustment of the previous rent and has rejected the application of the petitioner on a wholly different ground which cannot be sustained in law, this Court would deem it expeditient in the ends of justice that the matter relating to payment of rent in terms of Section 15 of the B.B.C. Act is decided afresh by the court below after giving opportunity of hearing to both the sides. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Court below which after hearing the parties and/or ascertaining the admitted proof of payment of rent prior to the institution of suit, would pass an appropriate order for payment of arrears of rent from the date of institution of the suit. It is made clear that while giving any adjustment only such payment will be allowed which is capable of being verified by any receipt in writing given by the petitioner. - 3 - With the aforementioned observations and directions this Civil Revision application is allowed. Bibhash (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)