(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 1638 OF 2011 Syed Sadeq s/o. Syed Habib, Age : 55 years, Occupation : Business, R/o. Near Akhtari Masjid, Natraj Rangmandir, Parali, Taluka : Parali (V.), District : Beed. .. Petitioner. versus Janmohammad s/o. Ibrahim Raj, Died through L.R., Fateh Mohammad s/o. Janmohammad Raj, Age : 70 years, Occupation : Pensioner, R/o. Peth Mohalla, Parali, Taluka : Parali (V.), Dist. Beed, and others. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. H.I. Pathan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. L.V. Sangit, Advocate, for respondent no.1. Mr. G.R. Syed, Advocate, holding for Mr. Zareefa Alamodi, Advocate, for respondent nos. 2-1, 2-2, 3, 4-1, 4-3 to 4-5, 5 and 6. (2) Respondent no.4-2 served (Absent). ........................ CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 18TH APRIL 2011 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard learned Counsel for respective parties. 2. None for respondent no.4-2 though duly served. 3. Adv. Mr. Pathan, for the petitioner, contends that by the impugned order defence of petitioner / tenant is struck off for not paying rent arrears from 1-1-1988 till 11-12-2003. He states that rent receipts annexed with Writ Petition show payment of rent even for that period and its acknowledgment by landlord. According to him, in view of this position, the defence could not have been struck off. Attention is invited to order dated 8-2-2010 passed by this court in Civil Revision Application No. 153/2008 to buttress the contention that opportunity to point out this document was given by this court and accordingly those documents were pointed out to Rent Controller. 4. Adv. Mr. Sangit, for respondent no.1 / landlord states (3) that there are no receipts on record issued by respondent no.1 / landlord for the period from 1-1-1988 to 11-12-2003. No liberty is given in Civil Revision Application by this court and order dated 26-9-2008 passed by Principal District Judge, Beed, has attained finality. 5. In Rent Appeal No. 1/1999, decided on 26-9-2008, Principal District Judge, Beed, has directed petitioner / tenant to deposit rent arrears from 1-1-1988 till the date of High Court's order. The said date of High Court's order is 24-1-2007. However, the petitioner has proved payment of rent for the period from 11-12-2003 till March 2009 and, therefore, the Rent Controller has found that rent for the period from 1-1-1988 till 11-12-2003 has not been deposited. According to Adv. Mr. Sangit, only after date of High Court's order, the rent arrears have been paid. In other words, according to him, rent prior to 24-1-2007 is still not paid. 6. The impugned order finds non-payment from 1-1-1988 till 11-12-2003. The direction dated 26-9-2008 has attained finality and in Civil Revision Application No. 153/2008, this court has not permitted petitioner / tenant to reopen that direction dated 26-9-2008 before lower authority i.e. Rent Controller. (4) 7. In view of this position, it is apparent that the Rent Controller has exercised powers available to him in accordance with law. There is no jurisdictional error or perversity. 8. In the result, the petition is dismissed. No costs. ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp1638