IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.343 of 2008 MOSTT. GITA SHARMA@MOSTT. GEETA DEVI w/o late Raj Kumar Sharma, resident of mohalla Purani Bazar, Raju Sah Lane, Sonarpatti, Ward No. 21(New), 17(old), P.O.-Ramna, P.S. Muzaffarpur)Town, District Muzaffarpur… …Defendant/Petitioner Versus 1. Radha Rani Sharma W/o late Lakshmi Narain Sharma, 2. Sudhir Kumar Sharma son of late Lakshmi Narain Sharma, …Plaintiffs/Opposite Parties Ist Set 3. Ashok Kumar Sharma son of late Lakshmi Narain Sharma, all residents of mohalla-Purani Bazar, Raju Sah lane, Sonarpatti Ward No. 21(New), 17(old), P.O. Ramna, P.S. Muzaffarpur(Town, District Muzaffarpur Defendant/Opp.Party-2nd Set …Opposite Parties. For the Petitioner: Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, Sr.Advocate, Mr. Virendra Kumar, Advocate, For Opp.Parties 1 & 2: Mr. B.K. Shukla, Advocate, Mr. S. Parasmani, Advocate, For Opp. Party No. 3: Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate. … 5 06.02.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, leaned counsel for opposite party nos. 1 and 2, learned counsel for opposite party no. 3. Defendant petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 03.01.2008, passed by the Munsif East, Muzaffarpur in Eviction Suit No. 38 of 2005, whereby due to non-compliance of the earlier order for depositing the arrears of rent as well as current rent, the court below has struck off the defence against ejectment of the defendant petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had challenged the earlier order dated - 2 - 13.08.2007 passed by the learned court below directing the petitioner to deposit the arrears of rent as well as current rent in Civil Revision No.1995 of 2007, which was dismissed on 04.02.2009 by this Court. He further submits that the factum of pendency of the civil revision application was communicated to the court below, however, the court below passed the impugned order dated 03.01.2008, whereby the defence against the ejectment has been struck off. Mr. B.K. Shukla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party nos. 1 and 2, submits in reply that after passing of the impugned order the court below granted sufficient time for compliance of the order and when the same was not complied, it has rightly passed the impugned order dated 03.01.2008. Having regard to the fact that the Bihar Building(Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1982 is a socio-economic legislation, the provision of which should be construed liberally in favour of the tenants, who constitute large number in society, and in view of the fact that the earlier Civil Revision No. 1995 of 2007 could be - 3 - taken up and disposed of by this Court on 04.02.2009, I ex debito justitiae exercise the revisional powers of this Court and direct the court below to restore back the defence of the defendant petitioner for the purposes of conducting the suit concerned on the following terms and conditions: (i) The defendant petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 5000/-(five thousand) as cost within thirty days from the date of this order, which the plaintiff opposite party shall be allowed to withdraw irrespective of the result of the suit; (ii) The defendant petitioner shall deposit the entire dues as required under order dated 13.08.2007 passed by the court below within forty five days. Failing compliance of either of conditions (i) and (ii) aforesaid, the impugned order dated 03.01.2008 shall be restored; (iii) The court below thereafter shall conduct the trial of the suit concerned on day-to-day basis and conclude the same and pronounce the judgment preferably within a period of six months. It is made clear that the court below shall reject - 4 - any prayer made by either of the parties, which may be made for the purposes of adjournment of the case except the most reasonable ones. This civil revision application is, accordingly, disposed of with the aforesaid observations/terms and conditions. SC (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J)