Amitava Roy, J.

1. Both the Civil Revision petition and the First Appeal involve the same parties. The issues raised are also identical. Both were heard analogously and have been disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2. I have heard Mr. N. Choudhury, learned Counsel for the appellants/petitioners and Mr. M. Singh, learned Counsel for the Respondents/Opposite Parties.

3. As the revision petition and the appeal relate to two different suits namely Rent Suit No. 3/84 and Rent Suit No. 1/93, narration of the facts pertaining thereto would be separately made.

4. The petitioners instituted four suits being Rent Suit Nos. 3/84, 4/87, 1/90 and 1/93 against the Respondents/Opposite Parties as defendants praying for a decree inter alia for paddy rent @ 22 mounds 10 kati per year together with compensation for delayed deposit thereof. The Suits relate to different periods of the Bengali Calendar year. The Rent Suit No. 1/93 and the Rent Suit No.3/84 with which we are concerned correspond to 1397 BS to 1399 BS and 1388 BS to 1390 BS respectively. Rent suit No.1/93 from which Rent Appeal No .4/96 had arisen relates to CRP No. 353/2002. Rent Suit No.3/84 pertaining to Rent Appeal No