The appeal is thus before this Bench.
The Bench before which the matter came up, numbericed that the decision relied on by the appellants was in companyflict with another decision of a companyequal Bench of this Court in T. Lakshmipathi and ors.
That tenancy companytinued.
In this appeal, the only ground taken was that the tenants having taken an assignment of the rights of certain companyowners, being the heirs of Quasim, the original landlord, the lease or the tenancy over the building must be taken to have been extinguished and since there was numbersubsisting relationship of landlord tenant between the parties, there companyld be numberdirection to deposit the rent in terms of the Act.
An appeal preferred by the appellants against the order fixing the fair rent as H.C. Appeal No.3/94 95 was also dismissed.
The High Court, by the impugned order, dismissed the revision finding against the only companytention on behalf of the appellants that since a revision filed by them against the order fixing the fair rent was pending, they companyld number be asked to deposit the rent at the rate at which the fair rent was fixed.
The plea based on assignment of the reversion by some of the legal representatives of Quasim, the landlord, and the companysequential extinguishment of the lease was rejected.
The trial companyrt issued a subsequent direction to the tenants to deposit the rent at the rate of Rs.4,950/ p.m., being the fair rent fixed under the Act.
This was challenged in revision by the appellants, before the High Court.
The trial companyrt, directed the defendants tenants, to deposit rent at the rate of Rs.600/ per month, on the basis that it was the last rent that was paid.
On 13.8.1997, the respondents herein filed a suit, T.S. Eviction No.80/97, seeking eviction of the appellants on grounds of number payment of rent and the bona fide need of the landlords for their own occupation.
Quasim, the landlord died.
On behalf of the appellants a decision of this Court in Abul Alim vs. Sheikh Jamal Uddin Ansari 1998 9 SCC 683 was relied on.
The respondents in this appeal, the heirs of Quasim, filed House Control Case No.33 of 1993 under the Act, for fixation of fair rent.
It is this order that is challenged in this appeal.
It is the case of the appellants that they have filed a revision under the Act against the order fixing fair rent and the same is pending.
His rights devolved on his heirs.
It is the case of the appellants that they have taken assignment of the rights of certain heirs, being companyowner landlords, on 29.12.1988.
On 13.9.1998, an application for the issue of a direction to the tenants to pay the rent in arrears, was also filed by the landlords.
By order dated 22.3.1994 the House Controller fixed the fair rent at Rs.4,950/ per month.
P. Nithyananda Reddy and others 2003 5 SCC 150 and referred the matter for being heard by a Bench of three Judges.
The suit was subsequently transferred.
Rent was enhanced and a fresh rent deed was executed on 7.4.1970.
K. BALASUBRAMANYAN, J. A building, as defined in the Bihar Buildings Lease, Rent and Eviction Control Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act , was taken on rent from one Quasim, the predecessor of the respondents, by Ram Babu Jaiswal, the predecessor of the appellants, some time in the year 1958.
