JUDGMENT :

1. These cases are taken up through video conferencing.

2. W.P.(C) No.1025 of 2021 has been filed for quashing the order dated 08.02.2021 passed by the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi-cum-The Revisional Authority under the Jharkhand Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 2011 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the Act, 2011’) in JBC Revision Case No.14 of 2020, whereby the revision preferred by M/s Maya Printers & Stationeries (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the tenant’) against the order dated 13.11.2020 passed by the House Rent Controller-cum-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar Ranchi (in short ‘HRC’) in JBC No.22 of 2018 has been rejected. Further prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 13.11.2020 passed by the HRC in JBC No.22 of 2018 in terms of which the defence of the tenant against the eviction case has been struck off.

3. W.P.(C) No.994 of 2020 has been filed by Vinay Goenka (hereinafter referred as the ‘landlord’) for issuance of direction upon the HRC to expeditiously decide JBC No.22 of 2018 filed by him for eviction of the tenants (respondent nos.2 and 3).

4. The factual background of the case, as stated in the writ petitions, is that the landlord instituted JBC No.22 of 2018 for eviction of the tenants under section 19(1)(a)(c)(d) of the Act, 2011 before HRC claiming that they violated the terms and conditions of the lease deed and defaulted in making payment of rent since April 2017. It was also averred in the said case that the premises was required by the landlord for own use and occupation. The tenant appeared and filed written statement and denied violation of the terms and conditions of the lease deed or any default in payment of rent. It was submitted that the landlord did not have requirement of the suit premises and, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the suit. During pendency of the said proceeding, the landlord filed a petition on 02.11.2018 under Section 27 of the Act, 2011 for issuance of direction upon the tenants to make payment of arrears of rent since April, 2017 as well as to deposit the current rent @ Rs.30,000/- per month. The said petition was contested by the tenant denying its liability for payment of arrears of rent, however, vide order dated 18.12.2018 the HRC directed the tenant to deposit arrears of rent due to the landlord before the Court of HRC from March 2018 @ Rs.15,000/- per month as also the current rent within first week of each succeeding month. It was also ordered that since one of the tenants i.e. M/s. Maya Intelligence and Security Services Pvt. Ltd. had not been appearing regularly, the case was declared ex-Parte against the said tenant and hence it was not possible to order the said tenant to make payment of its part of rent @ Rs.15,000/- per month. In compliance of the said order dated 18.12.2018, the tenant deposited a sum of Rs.1,65,000/- on 25.01.2019 and a sum of Rs.75,000/- on 02.08.2019 before the Court of HRC, which were duly received by the landlord without any objection or demur. The tenant further deposited a sum of Rs.30,000/- through cheque, however, the landlord did not encash the said cheque deliberately in order to get it dishonoured, therefore, apprehending mischief the tenant filed a petition on 01.11.2019 before the HRC informing the said authority about the said mischief of the landlord. Thereafter, the landlord presented the said cheque for clearance which was honoured on 11.12.2019. The tenant had the intention to comply the order dated 18.12.2018 passed by the HRC, however, unfortunately the youngest son of the tenant, namely, Ujjwal Prakash Tiwari met with an accident on 27.10.2019 and the tenant and other family members were busy towards treatment of her youngest son and were out of station. In the meantime, the landlord filed a petition dated 04.02.2020 for striking-off the defence against eviction of the tenant under section 27(1) of the Act, 2011 for alleged non-compliance of the order dated 18.12.2018. A r