( 1 ) THESE two C. R. Ps. arise out of the same common proceedings and thus they involve common questions of facts and law and as such I am disposing of both the C. R. Ps. by this common Judgment. The parties are referred to as they are arrayed before the Rent Controller.

( 2 ) THE petitioner in both the CRPs, is the tenant of the schedule mentioned premises and the respondent is the Landlord.

( 3 ) BOTH the CRPs have arisen out of the petition filed by the tenant under Order6, Rule 17r/w l51 C. P. C. , in J. A. No. 510/94 in R. C. No. 163/92 filed by the tenant on the file of the Addl. Rent Controller, Secunderabad. I have to note at this stage itself that the respondent-landlord has filed an eviction petition against the tenant in R. C. No. 131/92. One of the grounds of eviction is that the tenant had commited wilful default in payment of rent. On the other hand the tenant filed RC. No. 163/92 seeking permission of the court to deposit the rents intocourt as per Sec. 8 (5) of the A. P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (herein after called the rent Control Act ) Both the cases were clubbed together and common evidence was recorded and when t