O.P.Garg, J. - (1.) Originally late Ram Swaroop Agarwal was the tenant in premises No. 476 (old No. 364) Badshahi Mandi, Allahabad. After his death in the year 1980, his son Vinay Kumar Agarwal, the present petitioner inherited the tenancy rights. Gopal Chandra Bhattacharya and others claiming themselves to be the owner/land lords served a notice dated 19.6.1995 by registered post on the petitioner Vinay Kumar Agarwal requiring him to clear the arrears of rent for the period May, 1980 onwards and terminating his tenancy. The notice was duly served on the petitioner and he had, in fact, sent the reply thereto asserting that the arrears of rent after statutory deductions in the form of taxes, etc.. have already been deposited in court in proceedings under Section 30 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting. Rent and Eviction Act. 1972 (Act No. XIII of 1972) [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It was maintained by the petitioner that since no arrears of rent were due to be paid, the question of default in payment of rent on his part does not arise. Gopal Chandra Bhattacharya and others filed S.C.C. Suit No. 104 of 1995 alleging that the petitioner was tenant at the rate of Rs. 30 per month exclusive of house, water tax and electricity, charges ; that the defendant-tenant has not paid the arrears of rent as claimed in the composite notice of demand and to quit dated 19.6.1995. On the ground that the tenant has committed default in payment of arrears of rent within the meaning of Section 20 (2) (a) of the Act. his eviction was sought besides claiming one year's rent amounting to Rs. 360 with pendente lite and future mesne profits. After due contest, the suit was dismissed by the trial court on 8.5.2000. Aggrieved, the landlords preferred revision application No. 671 of 2000 under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act which has been allowed by the impugned order dated 7.12.2000, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The decree for possession of the tenanted accommodation after ejectment of the petitioner and for recovery of arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 360, pendente lite and future mesne profit at the rate of Rs. 30 per month was passed by the revisional court. It is in these circumstances that the present writ petition has come to be filed by the defendant-tenant under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the prayer that the decree passed by the revisional court be quashed.
(2.) Counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged.
(3.) Heard Sri Yogesh Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant and Sri Ratnakar Bharti appearing on behalf of the respondent-landlords.;