( 1 ) THIS application and Civil Revision Applications Nos. 96 of 1960 and 8 of 1961 though involving different facts raise common questions of law as to the construction of sec. 12 of the Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act (LVII of 1947) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and can expediently be disposed of by a common judgment. Though questions arising in these applications have been previously dealt with in several applications of this kind there have been so many opinions diversely expressed in reported as well as unreported judgments that we think that the law laid down in section 12 of the Act needs to be restated.

( 2 ) WE propose to take up first Civil Revision Application No. 86 of 1960 as it is in that application that the learned advocates concerned therein as also others interested in the other applications urged their various points of view and pointed out to us expressions of opinions in several judgments both reported and unreported.

( 3 ) IN Civil Revision Application No. 86 of 1960 the petitioner took over the premises in question on October 13 1952 as a monthly tenant at Rs. 25/as rent per month. He paid the rent upto July 12 1954 but did not pay any rent thereafter. On December 21 1954 the respondent gave notice demanding arrears of rent and terminating the tenancy. Inspite of that notice the petitioner did not pay the arrears nor did he file an application for fixation of the standard rent. It was only on August 8 1955 that he filed such an application being application No. 144 of 1955 for fixation of the standard rent The petitioner however did not deposit any amount towards the payment of the arrears due by him. On September 5 1955 the respondent filed the present suit for recovery of possession and arrears due. On December 22 1455 he appeared in Court in answer to the summons. On February 10 1956 he filed his written statement but did not deposit any amount in Court together with his written statement. The suit was fixed for hearing on March 22 1956 On that day the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 75/and between that date and the 25 of April 1957 he deposited diverse amounts in Court aggregating in all to Rs. 900. 00. On April 26 1957 he deposited a further amount of Rs. 30/in Court. On April 25 1957 which was the first day of the actual hearing of the suit issues were raised and evidence taken and on April 26 1957 the trial Court delivered the judgment and passed the decree allowing the respondents suit and ordering the petitioner to hand over possession.

( 4 ) THE petitioner was in arrears from July 13 1454 to April 12 1957 a period of 33 months and at the rate of Rs. 25/per month the arrears due and payable by him by the date of the decree viz. April 26 1957 came to Rs. 825. 00. Besides the amount of Rs. 825/he was also liable to pay the costs of the suit which were determined at Rs. 112-7-0. In all he was liable to pay to the respondent Rs. 937-7-0. Obviously therefore the amounts deposited by him by the first day of the hearing viz. April 25 1957 were short by Rs. 37-7-0. the learned trial Judge passed the decree as aforesaid against the petitioner holding that he had not performed the conditions laid down in sub-section (3) (b) of section 12 of the Act and ordered him to deliver up possession to the respondent. The petitioner filed an appeal against the aforesaid judgment and decree in the District Court. While the appeal was pending he deposited various amounts commencing from July 1957 to July 14 1958 aggregating in all to Rs. 399 The learned District Judge dismissed the petitioners appeal holding that sub-section (3) (b) was not complied with and therefore the decree for possession was rightly passed by the trial Court. The petitioner filed the present Civil Revision Application against the aforesaid order of dismissal of his appeal by the learned District Judge.

( 5 ) TWO principal contentions were raised by Mr. Shastri on behalf of the petitioner: (1) th