IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1069 of 1999 MD.TANQUR ALAM Versus HAZI ABDUL KAFI ----------- 10 18.07.2008 Heard counsel for the parties. Counsel for the defendant tenant petitioner submits that there was sufficient cause for not depositing of rent by the petitioner and in the circumstances the delay in depositing of rent of only three days was neither deliberate nor in any way directly attributable to the negligence on the part of the petitioner. Counsel for the plaintiff (landlord) opposite party, however submits that he has been harassed for no good reason in all these 12 years inasmuch as the eviction suit of the year, 1996 is still pending on account of the pendency of the Civil Revision application. This Court would find substance in the submission of the counsel for the opposite party inasmuch as the Civil Revision application has remained pending before this Court from 29.6.1999 and has been adjourned on as many as seven occasions in between 24.3.2005 and was ultimately dismissed for default on - 2 - 20.3.2006 and thereafter was restored by order dated 22.6.2006 and now has been taken for hearing. True it is that the petitioner cannot be held guilty for all these periods but it has transpired from the perusal of the record whenever this case was sought to be taken for hearing, the counsel for the petitioner successfully avoided the hearing on one ground and another and later on the case was dismissed for default. The restoration of this application and its being placed for hearing has itself consumed a period of more than two and half years. After the hearing the parties and taking into consideration that rent was deposited by the petitioner and that the consequence of the impugned order rejecting the defence of the petitioner against ejectment in a suit for eviction would be severe and disastrous for the petitioner, this court in the interest of justice would allow the prayer of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, this Court while allowing the application of the petitioner and setting aside the impugned order - 3 - would direct for payment of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by the petitioner to the opposite party, landlord within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. In the event, such amount is not deposited by the petitioner, his defence against ejectment shall be struck off. The Court below is further directed to ensure that the eviction suit itself is disposed of within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations and directions this Civil Revision application is allowed. BCJ (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)