Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. 1. This petition is filed by the petitioner in person who has been ordered to be evicted from the demised premises on 01.08.2014 on account of his failure to pay/deposit the arrears of rent assessed on 11.07.2014. Admittedly, the petitioner has already filed an appeal against the order of eviction in which the following order has been passed:- "As there are arguable points in the appeal. It be registered and notice be given to the respondent for 4.9.2014. Appellant has filed an application under Order 41, Rule 5 read with Section 151 C.P.C. for staying the execution of impugned order. Let notice of this application be also issued for 4.9.2014 and in the meanwhile the operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed subject to the condition if the appellant deposits the entire amount of provisional rent of Rs. 1,84,323/- assessed by learned Rent Controller within a period of 15 (Jays from today." 2. The petitioner has challenged orders dated 11.07.2014 by which provisional rent was assessed, dated 01.08.2014 ordering his eviction and dated 14.08.2014 by which he has been granted stay by the Appellate Court with the condition to deposit the entire provisional rent assessed by the learned Rent Controller. 3. Although the petitioner cannot challenge the orders dated 11.07.2014 and 01.08.2014 before this Court as these orders are subject matter of appeal already filed by him and pending before the Appellate Court, however, the order dated 14.08.2014 can still be challenged by him on the ground, as argued, that the condition imposed of depositing the entire amount of provisional rent is illegal. 4. It is submitted by the petitioner that he had always been ready and willing to pay the rent, but the landlord refused to take the rent, therefore, he is not in a position to pay the huge amount of rent, as ordered by the Appellate Court. It is also submitted by him that he may be given two years' time to pay the provisional rent, as ordered by the Appellate Court, by way of installments. 5. It is also submitted by him that he may be given two years' time to pay the provisional rent, as ordered by the Appellate Court, by way of installments. 5. After hearing the petitioner and examining the record, I am of the considered opinion that this kind of an order cannot be passed because if the landlord was not accepting the rent despite the offer made by the tenant, he could have made an application to the Rent Controller for depositing the rent in the Court and if that course has not been adopted by the tenant, he cannot ask for two years time to pay the provisional rent which he had not even challenged before the Court when it was assessed by the leaned Rent Controller. 6. As a matter of fact, the provisional rent was assessed on the basis of admitted rate of rent between the landlord and tenant who was found to be in arrears of the rent of 24 months. Thus, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, I do not find any reason to interfere in the order dated 14.08.2014 passed by the Appellate Court. Consequently, this revision petition is hereby dismissed being denuded of any merit.