The appellant companytested the suit and in his written statement inter alia raised the plea that the default in the deposit of rent pursuant to the orders passed by the High Court in the application under Section 15 of the Act within the prescribed period companyld number be a ground for his eviction.
100 of 1980 seeking eviction of the appellant on the ground that during the pendency of the appeal in the High Court arising out of the earlier suit, the appellant had number companyplied with the direction of the High Court to deposit the rent mad eon 25.9.1979, in the application under Section 15 of the Act within the prescribed time and was thus in default in payment to arrears of rent and, therefore, liable to be evicted.
During the pendency of that appeal, landlord respondent filed an application under Section 15 of the Bihar Building Control Act hereinafter the Act for deposit of arrears of rent accumulated during pendency of the appeal and future rent during the pendency of the appeal.
An order came to be made by the High Court on 25.9.1979 to deposit the arrears of rent by 15.11.1979.
The trial companyrt decreed title suit No.
It was also averred that since the respondent had withdrawn the rent amount, we had waived her right to companyplain about the delayed deposit of rent.
The appellant, however, deposited the arrears of rent on 9.2.1980 and that amount was subsequently withdrawn by the respondent landlord.
An appeal filed by the appellant before the District Judge was dismissed on 10.5.1990.
The appellant filed second appeal in the High Court, being Second Appeal No.
While the second appeal was pending in the High Court, the respondent instituted Title Suit No.
His second appeal failed before the High Court on 6.2.1991.
404 of 1979.
100 of 1980 on 29.3.1985.
Hence this appeal by special leave.
