IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12942 of 2011 Ravi Shankar Singh Versus Smt. Shobha Prasad ---------------------------------- 2. 11.08.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the tenant petitioner who was defendant in an eviction suit against the order dated 23.5.2011 passed by Munsif-II, Bhagalpur in Title Eviction Suit No. 10 of 1998 whereby the learned court below struck off the defence of the petitioner for non-compliance of the order directing him to deposit arrears and current rent of the suit premises @ 300/- per month by terms of order dated 5.8.2010. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has already filed suit for specific performance of contract being Title Suit No. 216 of 1997 which is pending in the court of Sub Judge 5th Bhaganpur and after filing that suit for specific performance of contract against the original landlord the original landlord sold the suit premises to the present plaintiff respondent. The learned counsel further submitted that other tenants had filed suit for specific performance of contract against the original landlord namely Anil Kumar Jiloka and the suit was 2 dismissed but on appeal the suit for specific performance of contract has been decreed in Title Appeal No. 58 of 2002 and they have filed Execution Case No. 3 of 2010. From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the present petitioner against the order of the Trial Court directing him to deposit the arrears as well as the current rent filed C.W.J.C. No. 15686 of 2010 for setting aside the order dated 5.8.2010. The said writ application has been dismissed on 31.3.2011. L.P.A. No. 787 of 2011 is pending against the said order. Thereafter, the landlord plaintiff filed application on 5.1.2011 for striking off the defence of the petitioner for non-compliance of the order dated 5.8.2010. On 23.5.2011 the petitioner who was defendant in the court below did not appear and, therefore, the learned court below passed the impugned order whereby the defence of the petitioner has been struck off. Under Section 15 of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1982 the court had no option but to strike off the defence of the defendant if the order passed by the court to deposit the arrears of rent within 15 days from the date of order is not complied with. Admittedly, in the present case the petitioner did not deposit the arrears inspite of the fact that the order passed by the court below has been upheld by the High 3 Court. In my opinion therefore, the petitioner is flouting the orders of the court and, therefore, the supervisory jurisdiction should not be exercised in favour of a person who is flouting the orders of the court. Therefore, this application is dismissed. S.S. (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)