Judgment : 1. This civil revision petition is filed challenging the order of the respondent made in E.P.No.40 of 2009 in P.T.A.No.59 of 2002 dated 13.01.2010. 2. The petitioner herein is the tenant under the respondent temple in respect of the agricultural lands. As he has defaulted in paying the periodical lease amount to the temple from the year 1998 to 2001, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner for evicting him. During the course of such proceedings, the petitioner herein, on 10.11.2008, has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.74,715/-on or before 05.01.2009. Considering the said request made by the petitioner, the matter was taken up on 05.01.2009 on which date it was found that the petitioner has not deposited or paid the arrears to the respondent temple. Consequently, a notice of eviction was issued on 08.06.2009 and thereafter, an order of eviction came to be passed. The said order of eviction was sought to be set aside with a delay of 109 days in E.P.No.40/2009. The said application was rejected by the respondent by holding that the order of eviction passed against the petitioner was not an exparte order and as the petitioner was already evicted and the possession was handed over to the temple on 13.01.2010. Challenging the same, the present civil revision petition is filed before this Court. 3. While admitting the civil revision petition, this Court by order dated 27.01.2010, directed the respondent to hand over the land on or before 05.02.2010 subject to a condition that the petitioner should pay a sum of Rs.10,000/-to the respondent being the part of the arrears of rent. It is stated that the said amount was paid and possession was also handed over to the petitioner within the time stipulated by this Court. Subsequently, the matter was listed before me on 04.07.2012. It was represented on that day that the petitioner had so far paid a sum of Rs.74,750/- to the respondent. However, the learned counsel for the respondent/temple submitted that apart from the said amount of Rs.74,750/-, the petitioner is liable to pay a further sum of Rs.1,65,000/-being the arrears of lease amount as on that date. Considering those submissions made by the respective counsels, this Court directed the petitioner to pay the said sum of Rs.1,65,000/- in three monthly installments. However, the learned counsel for the respondent/temple submitted that apart from the said amount of Rs.74,750/-, the petitioner is liable to pay a further sum of Rs.1,65,000/-being the arrears of lease amount as on that date. Considering those submissions made by the respective counsels, this Court directed the petitioner to pay the said sum of Rs.1,65,000/- in three monthly installments. It was made clear in the said order that if no such payment is made by the petitioner within the time stipulated therein, the stay already granted by this Court would get automatically vacated. The petitioner was also directed to pay the periodical rent without any default. After the said order made on 04.07.2012, the matter was listed before my predecessor on 04.09.2012 and on which day, an ajournment was sought for by the petitioner by informing that the last installment payment would be made in the mean time. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned to 30.10.2012. Thereafter, the matter is now listed today before me. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not paid the sum of Rs.1,65,000/- as directed by this Court in three monthly installments which period ended on 01.10.2012. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent also submitted that the conditional order imposed by this court was not complied with. 6. Heard both sides. 7. The petitioner filed this civil revision petition aggrieved against the order of the respondent in refusing to condone the delay of 109 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte order of eviction. This court while granting the interim stay has directed the respondent to restore possession and also directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/-. No doubt, the petitioner has paid the said amount and got the possession restored. The possession of the land was handed over to the petitioner and thereafter when the matter was listed before this Court on 04.07.2012, it was represented on behalf of the respondent that further arrears to the tune of Rs.1,65,000/- was due from the petitioner as on that date. Considering the said submission, this Court directed and gave an opportunity to the petitioner to pay the arrears amount in three monthly installments commencing from the month of August 2012. Considering the said submission, this Court directed and gave an opportunity to the petitioner to pay the arrears amount in three monthly installments commencing from the month of August 2012. The petitioner has not utilised the said opportunity and it is admitted by both sides that no amount is paid by the petitioner as per the direction issued by this court on 04.07.2012. 8. Therefore, it shows that the petitioner has no bonafide and he is not entitled to any relief from this court. It is clear that the petitioner is interested only in restoration of the possession and not interested in paying the rental arrears. Already an eviction order is passed against him. Therefore, such eviction order on the reason that the petitioner had defaulted in making the rental arrears, cannot be found fault with. At any event, the petitioner has filed an application to condone the delay of 109 days in filing a petition to set aside the exparte order. As the conduct of the petitioner is very clear that he is only trying to keep the possession of the property without payment of rental arrears, this Court cannot entertain such attitude and consequently, I find that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in this civil revision petition. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed and the respondent is at liberty to take appropriate proceedings to restore the possession of the land from the petitioner in accordance with law. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.