P.N. Mookerjee, J. - (1.) This Rule arises out of a proceeding for ejectment before the Thika Controller. It appears that the landlord's application for ejectment was allowed by the Thika Controller by his Order No. 73, passed as far back as June 14, 1952, presumably on the ground of bona fide requirement and also default in the payment of rent. That order contained a provision that if the tenant deposited the arrears of rent within a period of 30 days, the order of ejectment would not be executable. There was no provision made in the order for payment of any compensation to the tenant.
(2.) The learned Controller, thereafter, when he found that the tenant had not made any deposit within 30 days, proceeded to direct, by a subsequent order, dated July 14, 1952, that ejectment would be allowed only on payment of compensation, and, by a later order, dated November 21, 1953, the compensation was assessed at Rs. 461-8-0 and the landlord was directed to pay the said compensation before taking pos-session of the disputed land. Thereafter followed further proceedings in the shape of some claim made by the landlord for set off of arrears of rent and mesne profits as against this asset compensation and, this having been disallowed by the learned Controller there was an appeal taken before the appellate authority. The order of the Controller refusing set off was however, affirmed and, eventually, on September 7, 1954, the present Rule was obtained by the landlord petitioner.
(3.) I have not been shown any provision of law which authorises or entitles the Thika Controller to allow, in the events which have happened in the present case, any set off or adjustment of the arrears of rent and/or mesne profits against the compensation money and the Controller and the Appellate Judge appear to have been fully justified in refusing the petitioner's prayer for set off.;