IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.2188 of 2008 RAM DARAS PRASAD @ RAM DAS PRASAD Versus BABAN SAH & ANR ----------- 2 15/1/2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner. For the reasons mentioned in the limitation petition (I.A. No.7680/2008), is allowed and the delay in filing of this Civil Revision Application is condoned. On merits, this Court is of the view that the court below while allowing the application under section 15 of the B.B.C.Act ought to have avoided in coming to any conclusion which could be used by either of the parties as definite opinion of the Court. Opinion expressed by the Court in the impugned order at that moment, title of the landlord in question disputed by the contesting defendant- tenant, cannot be decided in an eviction suit is definitely uncalled for. Similarly, recording of other findings in the impugned order should have been avoided considering that the scope of Section 15 B.B.C. was itself confined to an interlocutory issue of payment of last rent to the plaintiff. 2 This Court, however, would find that the ultimate conclusion arrived at by the court below in rejecting the prayer of the plaintiff-petitioner under section 15 of the Act, does not suffer from any jurisdictional error, in as much as, the court below had found that there was no proof of last rent paid and the question of relationship of landlord and tenant was seriously disputed as both the parties are said to have been armed with respective sale deeds for establishing their claim as landlord of the suit premises. In that view of the matter, this Court would not find any error in the impugned order rejecting prayer of the plaintiff-petitioner for payment of rent during pendency of the suit in terms of section 15 of the B.B.C.Act. This Court, taking into account that the eviction suit of the year 2005 is pending for last three years, would direct for its expeditious disposal preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and of course without being 3 influenced by any of the findings in the impugned order. With the aforementioned observations this Civil Revision Application is dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) Abhay Kumar