JUDGMENT

1. These five appeals arise out of as many suits that were instituted by the appellant for enhancement of rent u/s 30, Ben. Ten. Act. The Courts below have dismissed the suits on the ground that they were not maintainable in view of Section 109 of that Act.

2. The plaintiff had previously filed applications u/s 105 of the Act. She was then a cosharer landord, her share amounting to 14 annas. She made her cosharers pro forma opposite parties to her applications but prayed for enhancement of the rent due to her share. The defendants, who were the principal opposite parties in the proceedings, contested the maintainability of the application, and the trial Court, as well as the Court of first appeal, upheld the objection and ruled that the applications did not lie. She then preferred second appeals to this Court, which held that under certain conditions and circumstances the applications might lie - notably, if there were separate contracts between the parties. As the facts had not been investigated, the cases were remanded for further investigation. The defendants persisted in their opposition, and on that the plaintiff withdrew the applications, alleging that there were defec