IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1601 of 2008 PAWAN KUMAR SAH Versus SYED TANWEER ASHRAF With C.R. No. 1602 of 2008 URMILA DEVI SAH @ URMILA DEVI Versus SYED TANWEER ASHRAF -- 2 19/9/2008 Heard counsel for the parties both on the limitation as also on merits. For the reasons mentioned in I.A. No. 5778/2008 and I.A. No.5779/2008 are allowed and delay in filing of both the Civil Revision application are condoned on merits. This Court would however find no ground to interfere with the impugned order which has been passed under section 15 of the B.B.C. Act, directing the petitioners to make payment or arrear and current rent. Mr Chitranjan Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, however, would submit that the impugned order has the effect of creating huge financial liability for the petitioners in both the cases requiring them to make payment in the vicinity of Rupees five lacs approximately only by way 2 of payment of arrear of rent, which cannot be paid by them in one lumpsum. In this regard he has also relied the earlier written offer of the petitioners in their application (Annexure-1) in the both the cases for depositing the rent in court. Mr. Sinha would further submit that a draft of Rs. 63,000/- by way of arrears of rent has already been paid to the landlord. Considering the aforementioned peculiar facts of this case, this Court would direct the petitioner to deposit entire amount of arrears within a period of six months commencing from 1st of November 2008 by paying it in six equal installments along with current rent after adjusting the aforementioned sum of Rs. 63,000/-. The court below will however verify this fact from the plaintiff, landlord and in the event payment of amount by a bank draft is admitted by the opposite party the landlord towards arrear of rent, the same will be adjusted towards arrear, as has been directed to be paid in the 3 impugned order. It is however made clear that in case there is any default in payment of current rent and/or arrears of rent as directed above, the defence of the petitioner against ejectment shall be struck off. With aforementioned modification in impugned order both the application are disposed of. ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J. ) Abhay Kumar