Pritam Singh Safeer, J.
(1) The counsel for the appellants assails the findings recorded in paragraph 14 of the impugned order and submits that as soon as the rent legally recoverable is deposited in. compliance with the order made under section 15(1) of the Act 59 of 1958, sub-section (6) of Section 15 comes into operation so as to cause a dismissal of the application for eviction filed under section 14(l)(a) of the Act. Sub-sections 15(1) and (6) bs noticed:-
'15.(1) In every proceeding for the recovery of possession of any premises on the ground specified in clause (a) of the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 14, the Controller shall, after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, make anorder directing the tenant to pay to the landlord or deposit with the Controller within one month of the date of the order, an amount calculated at the rate of rent at which it was last paid for the period for which the arrears of the rent were legally recoverable from the tenant including the period subsequent thereto up to the end of the month previous to that in which payment or deposit is made and to continue to pay or deposit, month by month, by the fifteenth of each succeeding month, a sum equivalent to the rent at that rate.'
'(6)If a tenant makes payment or deposit as required by subsection (1) or sub-section (3), no order shall be made for the recovery of possession on the ground of default in the payment of rent by the tenant, but the Controller may allow such costs as he may deem fit to the landlord. I cannot accept the contention that section 15(6) will cause automatic dismissal of the application preferred under section 14(l)(a) of the Act. That provision will come in for consideration only when the Controller takes up the application on the date fixed for appearance of the parties for further proceedings. The provision places a limitation on the authority of the Controller and where it is found that the tenant has made the payment or deposit as required by the order made under sub-section. (1) of section 15 or sub-section (3) thereof, the Controller shall not make any order for the recovery of possession on the ground of default of payment of rent by the tenant, but even then he may allow such costs, as he may deem fit, to the landlord.'
(2) The provision regulates the disposal of an application under section 14(l)(a). It does not relieve the tenant from his liability of continuing to deposit rent in accordance with an order made under section 15(1) of the Act till such date when an order is actually passed by the Controller under section 15(6) dismissing the application filed undsr section 14(l)(a) ofthe Act.
(3) No other ground is urged. The appeal is dismissed in I/mine.