( 1 ) THE problem presented by this revision petition is whether a tenant can file a suit claiming reliefs provided under S. 44 of the Mysore Rent control Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act ). The question is seemingly covered by no reported decision. ( 2 ) THE petitioner is the owner of C. T. S. No. 1531, a shop in Athani town, which is occupied by a partnership firm styled as Gadamal Motiji marwadi, as a tenant. The firm by its partners instituted O. S. No. 1968 in the Court of the Munsiff, Athani, complaining that the landlord has failed to carry out reasonable and necessary repairs to the shop building and keep the premises in a good condition. They have prayed that he be directed to carry out, at his own expense, within a reasonable time, all the necessary and reasonable repairs to the building. Alternatively, they have prayed for a decree that in the event of the landlord's failure to carry out the reasonable and necessary repairs, they be permitted to get all the said repairs carried out and the costs thereon may be awarded to them against the landlord. ( 3 ) THE landlord raised a preliminary objection stating that the suit is not maintainable for any relief to be granted under S. 44 of the Act. The Munsiff by his order dated 30-9-1969 over-ruling the objection, held that the suit is maintainable. Aggrieved by the said order, the above revision petition has been preferred. ( 4 ) MR. Shirgurkar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits here as argued below, that the Act is a self contained code and that any relief under the Act, could be granted only by the authorities constituted therein and not by invoking the ordinary jurisdiction of the civil courts. Mr. Benedikar for the respondents, seeks to support the order under revision by contending that the Act does not exclude the jurisdiction of the civil court, ( 5 ) IN order to appreciate the rival contentions, it is necessary to set out the relevant provisions of the Act. Section 44 of the Act provides:-"44. Repairs and improvements. (1) Every landlord shall be bound to keep the building in reasonably good repair. Section 44 of the Act provides:-"44. Repairs and improvements. (1) Every landlord shall be bound to keep the building in reasonably good repair. (2) If the landlord neglects to make, within a reasonable time after a notice by the tenant is served upon him by registered post, any repairs which he is bound to make under sub-sec. (1) the tenant may make the repairs himself and deduct the cost of such repairs from the rent or otherwise recover it from the landlord: provided that where the tenant makes the repairs himself, the amount so deducted or recoverable in any year shall not exceed onetwelfth of the rent payable by the tenant for that year. (3) Where the cost of such repairs exceeds one twelfth of the rent payable bv the tenant for that vear or where the building is directed to be leased under S. 5 or S. 6, the Court may, by order, direct the landlord to execute such repairs which he is bound to make under sub-section (1), and as may be specified in the notice within such reasonable time as may be mentioned therein; and if the landlord fails to execute repairs in pursuance of such order the Court may permit the tenant to cause the repairs specified in the order, to be executed at the expense of the landlord and the cost thereof may, without prejudice to any other mode of recovery be deducted from the rent payable to the landlord. "court is denned under Section 3 (d) as: "court" means, in respect of anv local area, any civil court which may be specially authorised bv the State Government by Notification in this behalf, or where no civil court is so authorised, (i) the Court of the Civil Judge, (Junior Division) in the bombay area (ii) the Court of the District Munsiff in the Madras Area and (iii) the Court of the Munsiff in Coorg District, Hyderabad area and Mysore Area, having territorial jurisdiction in such area. Rule 14 of the Mvsore Rent Control Rules provides that in applications made under the Act to the Court, the Court shall follow, as far as may be and with the necessary modifications the procedure applicable to small cause suits prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure. 1908, when such suits are tred by Courts invested with the jurisdiction of a Court of Small causes. 1908, when such suits are tred by Courts invested with the jurisdiction of a Court of Small causes. An order passed under Section 44 is not appealable, but a revision lies to the High Court as provided bv Section 50 of the Act. ( 6 ) SECTION 44 does not give anv guidance about the kind of repairs which the land lord is bound to make. It must depend upon the condition of the building at the commencement of the lease and if the house is an old one, the landlord is bound only to keep the house in good repair as an old house. In other words, the premises must be kept in good and tenantable condition and repair. If the landlord neglects to make such repairs, the tenant may call upon him to make the repairs and on failure to do so within a reasonable time, the tenant may make the repairs himself and deduct the cost of such repairs from the rent or otherwise recover it from the landlord subject to the condition that the cost of repairs shall not exceed one-twelfth of the annual rent of the building. If the cost exceeds one-twelfth of the rent payable by the tenant for that year, or where the building is directed to be leased under Section 5 or section 6 the tenant may invoke the jurisdiction of the court under sub-section (3) of S. 44. The Court, in such a case may by order direct the landlord to execute such repairs which he is bound to make and if the landlord fails to do so within a reasonable time, it may then permit the tenant to get the repairs done at the cost of the landlord. The court also may by order permit the tenant to deduct the amount so spent from the rent payable to the landlord. These provisions make it abundantly clear that in matters of repairs to a building, the Court under the Act is given complete powers with its summary jurisdiction. The legislature probably intended that the parties should not be driven to a protracted litigation by way of suit with regard to repairs to any premises when the immediate attention of the landlord is required. ( 7 ) IN the view that I have taken, the suit brought by the plaintiffs must be held to be not maintainable. The legislature probably intended that the parties should not be driven to a protracted litigation by way of suit with regard to repairs to any premises when the immediate attention of the landlord is required. ( 7 ) IN the view that I have taken, the suit brought by the plaintiffs must be held to be not maintainable. ( 8 ) AT this stage, Mr. Benadikar submitted that he may be permitted to convert the suit into an application under the Act. He may move the court below for suitable orders. The petition therefore is allowed and the order under revision is set aside. No costs. --- *** --- .