- (1.) Heard Sri K. Ajit, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appeared for the respondents though the case has been called in revised list.
(2.) The petitioner is purchaser of land in dispute subsequently and the tenant was occupying the premises in question before such purchase. The petitioner filed an application under Section 21(1)(a) of Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972) (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1972") for eviction and release which was allowed by Trial Court but the same has been reversed by Appellate Court on the ground that notice contemplated under Section 21(1)(a) first proviso was not served upon the tenant, therefore application itself was not entertainable by the Court below. Aggrieved by Appellate Court order dated 16th September, 1989, present writ petition has been filed by the landlord petitioner.
(3.) It is contended that a notice was issued by registered post, hence presumption lie that it must have been served upon the addressee in view of Section 114 (g) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1872"), and, the Revisional Court has committed a patent error of law in not appreciating the above provision and its legal consequence.;