The Chief Justice.-I agree that the application should be dismissed. I only wish to add a few words on the point raised by Dr. John purporting to rely upon the decision in Raja Chetty v. Jagannathadas Govindas1 to which I was a party. I do not think that the doctrine of contracting out of the statute can possibly be of any help to Dr. John in this case for two reasons which are, in my opinion, conclusive. The first reason is that the lease in his client’s favour was executed on 22nd June, 1946, i.e., before the passing of Madras Act XV of 1946. On the date of the execution of the lease, the landlord had no right under the Rent Control Order then in force to apply to the Controller for fixation of a fair rent. It is only the tenant who could approach the Controller for that relief. Obviously, a person cannot be said to have abandoned a right by reason of an agreement when on the date of that agreement the law did not confer on him that right. I must confess that this aspect was overlooked during the course of the arguments. The second of the reasons is that it is nobody’s case that the parties were aware of the fair rent for the building and that what was fixed under the co