ORDER D.P.S. Chauhan, J. 1. Against the petitioner a suit was filed by the landlord seaking relief of his eviction, arrears of rent and mesne profits. In that suit a written statement was filed by the present petitioner wherein he stated that the had vacated the premises in respect of which the suit has been filed. The petitioner moved two applications. One application was under Order 33, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The application was rejected as the petitioner was not found indigent person. The second application was under Order 8, Rule 6A of the Code of Civil Procedure setting up a counter claim. The counter claim was also rejected as being barred by time by the trial Court as well as by the Court of revision. The order of the trial Court dated 1.10.1993 and the order of the revisional Court dated 21.3.1995 are under challenge in the present petition. 2. The petitioner submitted that so far as the rejection of the application under Order 33, Rules 1 & 2, C.P.C. is concerned, he has no grievance but so far as the application under Order 8, Rule 6A, C.P.C. is concerned, he is aggrieved. He submitted that under Article 22 of the Indian Limitation Act, the limitation to start from the date of the demand. Article 22 is as extracted below - Description of suit Period of limitation Time from which period begins to run. 22. For money deposited under an agreement that it shall be payable on demand including money of a customer in the hands of his banker so payable." Three years When the demand is made. This article will not be attracted for the reason that advance rent of one year was paid to the landlord not under an agreement that it shall be payable on demand. Apart from this, the petitioner has filed along with the petition a copy of the counter claim as Annexure-P/2. Even in the counter claim, the petitioner has not disclosed anywhere as to when the limitation started for his claim, has not placed the reliance on Art. 22 of the Act and has not stated that the amount deposited was under an agreement that it shall be payable on demand. In view of the this, the Courts below have not committed any error. 3. I find no merit in the petition. It is accordingly dismissed. In view of the this, the Courts below have not committed any error. 3. I find no merit in the petition. It is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed