JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The appellant is original defendant. 3. Tenancy has been created in the year 1982/1987. 4. Eviction Title Suit No. 18 of 2003 has been filed by the plaintiffs-landlord for evicting the defendant-tenant on the ground of personal necessity and default in making payment of rent for the period August, 2002 to May, 2003. 5. The tenancy has been admitted by the parties. Relationship of landlord and tenant is not in dispute. The only defence has been taken by the defendant that he is not defaulter for the alleged period i.e. August, 2002 to May, 2003 and further there is no bonafide requirement of the suit property by the plaintiffs. 6. There is concurrent finding of both the courts below regarding default in making payment of rent for the period August, 2002 to May, 2003 and further the personal necessity as claimed by the plaintiffs-landlord and on the basis of the said finding, decree of eviction has been passed against the defendant-tenant, which has been affirmed by the Appellate Court also. 7. The present appeal is against the concurrent finding of both the courts below. 8. The point raised by the appellant firstly that past conduct of the plaintiffs-landlord has not been taken care by both the courts below and in spite of sufficient evidence available on record, the same has been noted in the judgment by both the courts that plaintiffs-landlord used to grant rent receipt lump-sum for three to four months at a time and not regularly. Once it has been asserted by the appellant-tenant that payment has been made and considering the past conduct of the landlord, the finding should have recorded that there is no default in making payment of rent as it is usual habit of the landlord not to grant rent receipt regularly. 9. In substance, argument has been advanced that tenant has been trapped by the landlord by showing good gesture. 10. 9. In substance, argument has been advanced that tenant has been trapped by the landlord by showing good gesture. 10. At this stage, Section 19 and 20 of Jharkhand Building (Lease Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 2000 is relevant and the same is quoted hereunder: “Section 19 - Deposit of rent by tenant on refusal of the landlord to accept it or in case of doubt or dispute as to the person entitled to receive it (1) When a landlord refuses to accept any rent lawfully payable to him by a tenant in respect of any building, the tenant may remit such rent, and continue to remit any subsequent rent which becomes due in respect of such building, by postal money order to the landlord. (2) Where any (Substituted by Act 4 of 1994 (w.e.f. 14.2.1994).) [bonafide doubt or dispute has arisen as to the person who is entitled to receive any rent in respect of any building, the tenant may deposit such rent in the prescribed manner, stat-ing the circumstances under which such deposit is made, and, may until such doubt has been removed or such dispute has been settled by the decision of any competent Court or by settlement between the parties, continue to deposit in like manner, the rent that may subsequently become due in respect of such building. (3) When a deposit has been made under sub-section (2), the amount of such deposit shall be held by the Controller pending the removal of the doubt or the settlement of the dispute, which has arisen as to the person, who is entitled to receive the rent, either by the decision of a competent Court or by settlement between the parties, and the amount of such deposit may be withdrawn by the person who is declared by such Court to be entitled to it or who is held by the Controller to be entitled to it in accordance with such settlement. Section 20 - Tenant making payment of rent entitled to receipt (1) Every tenant who makes a payment on account of rent to his landlord shall be entitled to obtain forthwith from the landlord a receipt in the prescribed form for the amount of rent paid by him, duly signed by the landlord or his appointed agent. Section 20 - Tenant making payment of rent entitled to receipt (1) Every tenant who makes a payment on account of rent to his landlord shall be entitled to obtain forthwith from the landlord a receipt in the prescribed form for the amount of rent paid by him, duly signed by the landlord or his appointed agent. (2) If a landlord, without reasonable cause fails to deliver the tenant a receipt, as required by sub-section (1), such landlord shall be liable to fine not exceeding double the amount of rent so paid to be imposed after summary inquiry by the Controller upon a complaint of the party aggrieved within three months from the date of such failure.” 11. From mere perusal of above Sections, it is evident that the law maker were aware that such course may be adopted by the landlord to harass the tenant and further to make him/her defaulter and this situation has been taken care under Section 19 and 20 of Jharkhand Building (Lease Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 2000. 12. Tenant has been given right to move to controller, “within three months” for getting rent receipt, if in spite of payment of Rent, receipt is denied by the landlord. 13. In the present case, as per tenant, Rent receipt for the period August, 2002 to May, 2003 has been denied i.e. period of default claimed by the landlord/plaintiff. But, recourse to Section 20 has not been taken by tenant within three months. 14. Therefore, in view of the above Sections, argument advanced on behalf of the appellant-tenant is not tenable and the same is, hereby, rejected. 15. In view of the above discussion and concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below, this Court finds that no substantial question of law is involved in the present second appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. 16. I.A. No. 5696 of 2018 also stands dismissed. I.A. No. 6904 of 2018 17. Since the Appeal does not survive and the same has not been admitted, an application under Order -1 Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure filed by the Intervener is rejected.