( 1 ) CERTAIN attractive questions of law were raised in this Rule, but in our view the petitioner is debarred from urging them in view of the facts of the case.

( 2 ) AN order under Section 14 (4) was made against the petitioner on 17-8-1951. It appears that in his defence in the suit, he has taken a plea that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between him and the opposite party, Mr. Bose, who appears for the petitioner, contended that since that defence had bean taken in the written statement, there could not be any question of making any order under Section 14 (4) till the issue raised by that defence was decided against his client and it I was held that he was, in fact, a tenant. That contention appears to be right. The Rent Act can apply only to tenants. In fact, Section 14 (4) itself says that an order under that section will be made if the 'tenant' contests the suit. If the person, sued as a tenant, pleads that he is not a tenant, then till that question is decided against him, there can be no question of proceeding against him as a tenant or applying to him Section 14 (4) or any other provision of the Rent Act. While that is quite true, it