IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18735 of 2011 Sri Ashok Kumar Chopra Versus Ajay Kumar ---------------------------------- 03. 16.11.2011 The learned senior counsel, Mr. T.N. Maity, appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that all the documents showing payment of rent at the rate of Rs.6000/- per month through cheque to the plaintiff were filed before the Court below along with the rejoinder application filed by the petitioner against the application filed under Section 15 of the B.B.C. Act by the plaintiff but the learned Court below without considering those documents directed the petitioner to deposit the arrears as well as current rent at the rate of Rs.6000/-. The learned counsel further submitted that in fact there is no arrear and also that the petitioner is regularly paying the rent through cheque to the plaintiff. The learned Court below mechanically passed the order. A statement to this effect has been made at paragraph 10 of the writ application. The statement of bank account has also been annexed with this writ application as Annexure ‘5’. If it is correct then from perusal of - 2 - the impugned order, it appears that the learned Court below has not at all considered these documents and passed the order. In such view of the matter the Court below is directed to pass a fresh order within 2 weeks regarding the arrears of rent considering the documents if already filed by the petitioner without being prejudiced by the impugned order dated 10.08.2011. If documents were not filed, no order need be passed by the Court below. If the Court below will find that the statement made by the petitioner is correct then the Court below is at liberty to modify or recall that part of the impugned order. If it is found that the statement made by the petitioner is wrong then the Court below is at liberty to impose heavy cost on the petitioner. With this observation, this writ application is disposed of. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)