LALIT MOHAN SHARMA, J.

1. This civil revision application by the defendant in a pending suit for his eviction from a building in the town of Patna is directed against the order passed by the Court below under S. 11-A of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act (hereinafter fererred to as the Act). The petitioner was inducted as a tenant by the plaintiff-landlord originally on a monthly rental of Rs. 160/-. The rent was enhanced several times and since April 1970 it has been at the rate of Rs. 200.00 per month. The plaintiff applied for a direction under S. 11-A of the Act to the defendant to deposit month to month rent as also the arrears of rent since July, 1972. Admittedly, the rent for the period April, 1970 to June, 1972 was paid at the rate of Rs. 200.00 per month. The suit was filed on 2-12-1972. In view of the Full Bench decision in Ramnandan Sharma V/s. Maya Devi, 1974 0 BBCJ 818, the Court could not and did not pass any order in regard to the period prior to the institution of the suit. By the impugned order, the Court below directed the defendant to deposit the arrears of rent since the filing of the suit as also the future rent at the rate of Rs. 200.00 per month as the rent was admittedly last paid at the rate.

2. The petitioner contended that since the original rent was at the rate of Rs. 160.00 per month, the subsequent enhancement by private agreement between the parties, without recourse to the provisions of the Act, were illegal and the plaintiff was not entitled to the additional amounts over and above Rs. 160.00 per month realised by him. The petitioner claimed a set off on this account. He further said that the future rent also will be deposited by him at the rate of Rs. 160.00 per month only.

3. This case was heard by Mr. Justice H. L. Agrawal singly who was of the view that the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Manoranjan Nath Patra V/s. Kashi Prasad Sah, 1974 0 BLJR 140, relied upon by the petitioner, was not consistent with the earlier Division Bench decision in S. M. Khalil V/s. Akhauri Sitaram, AIR 1958 Pat 103 and the Full Bench decision in Mahabir Ram V/s. Shiva Shankar Prasad, AIR 1968 Pat 415. He suggested that the decision in Manoranjan Nath Patra V/s. Kashi Prasad Sah (Supra) should be reconsidered by a larger Bench and directed that the case be placed before the Hon ble Chief Justice for the purpose. In these circumstances, this civil revision application has been ordered to be heard by the Full Bench.

4. Although certain other points are also mentioned in the civil revision application, at the time of hearing, the only question which was pressed was that the Court below was not entitled to direct the petitioner to deposit the rent at the rate of Rs. 200.00 per month. In view of S. 4 of the Act, the original rate of Rupees 160.00 per month continued to be the rent lawfully payable and the subsequent enhancements were illegal. The defendant was entitled to set off the additional amount paid. He would be entitled to deposit the future rent also, after accounting, at the rate of Rs. 160.00 per month. On behalf of the plaintiff-landlord, it has been contended that the impugned order has been correctly passed on the basis of the rate at which the rent was admittedly last paid.

5. The question is dependant on the interpretation of S. 11-A of the Act which is quoted below :

"11-A. Deposit of rent by tenants in suits for ejectment-If in a suit for recovery of possession of any building the tenant contests the suit, as regards claim for ejectment, the landlord may make an application at any stage of the suit for order on the tenant to deposit month by month rent at the rate at which it was last paid and also the arrears of rent, if any, and the Court, after giving an opportunity to the parties to be heard, may make an order for deposit of rent at such rate as may be determined month by month and the arrears of rent, if any, and on failure of the tenant to deposit