( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

( 3 ) THE present appeals are directed against the order passed in revision by the High Court dismissing the revision petitions filed by the appellant. In order to appreciate the controversy we are herewith giving certain essential facts.

( 4 ) THE appellant is running a tourist hotel in the disputed premises. In the earlier proceedings for eviction before the High Court, the appellant was found to be in arrears of rent and hence directed, unless he deposits arrears of rent within a month, eviction against him is decreed. So far as order fixing rent is concerned, it was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the rent Controller for adjudication afresh in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the appellant placed strong reliance on this order of the High court, wherein certain claims made by the tenant as against the landlord were referred to get it adjudicated from the civil court, for which he sought adjustment in the rent.

( 5 ) IT seems in spite of the aforesaid litigation and decree the appellant again fell into arrears of rent as no payment was made by him from september 1986 till February 1993 which l