IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1096 of 2008 RAM UDGAR SHARMA Versus KAMESHWARI PRIYA POOR HOME With C.R.No. 1273 of 2007 Ram Udgar Sharma Vs. Sri Kameshwari Priya Poor Home ----------- 3 4/8/2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. Having perused the impugned order dated 7.5.2007 in C.R. No. 1273 of 2007 and order dated 19.4.2008 in C.R. No. 1096 of 2008, this Court is of the opinion, that the order directing the petitioner, tenant, to pay the rent of Rs. 1020/- per month with effect from the date of institution of the suit, does not suffer from any jurisdictional error, in as much as, when it was an admitted fact that the house controller in a proceeding instituted much before filing of the suit by his order dated 18.12.2001 had fixed rent of Rs. 1020/- per month payable by the petitioner with effect from 9.6.1999, the conclusion arrived at by the court below holding that last rent paid for the purpose of section 15 of the Act to be Rs. 1020/- cannot be said to be vitiated by any material irregularity. In that view of the matter, this Court does not find any merit in C.R. No. 1273 of 2002 and the same must be dismissed. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner draws attention towards the second impugned order 2 dated 19.4.2008 passed in C.R. No. 1096 of 2008, whereby and whereunder, the court below on account of non compliance of the aforementioned order dated 7.5.2007 has proceeded to strike off defence of the petitioner. In my opinion, the court below has again not committed any material irregularity or jurisdictional error because it is mandate of law that if the tenant does not pay the rent by complying the order under section 15 of B.B.C.Act he has to suffer, and consequently his defence is to be struck off. At this stage, when this Court has passed order to the effect that both the civil revision applications have to be dismissed by affirming the order of the court below dated 7.5.2007 and 19.4.2008, counsel for the petitioner submits that he is prepared to deposit the entire arrears of rent along with cost of Rs. 7,500/- within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order so that he may at least contest the suit on merit. In the opinion of this Court if the petitioner ultimately has realized his mistake and is prepared to pay the amount, the interest of justice will be better served by allowing the petitioner to contest the suit on merit. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 19.4.2008 is modified to the extent that if the petitioner deposits the entire arrear of rent + cost of Rs. 7,500/- within a period of six months, in four equal instalments, the court 3 below will allow the petitioner to adduce his evidence in his defence by recalling the order of striking of his defence. With the aforementioned observation both the civil revision applications are disposed of. ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J. ) Abhay Kumar