- (1.) Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gulrej Khan, Advocate, holding brief of Sri J.H. Khan, learned Counsel for the respondents. The petitioner Ugrasen is the tenant in a shop in dispute, which is part of house No. D-47/195-J, Mohalla Ramapura, Varanasi City, owned by respondent Smt. Parmeshwari Devi. The respondent-landlord instituted SCC Suit No. 116 of 1998 seeking eviction of petitioner from accommodation in question, on the ground of default, in payment of rent. The suit was decreed by Small Cause Court, Varanasi vide judgment and decree dated 6.10.2004. Petitioner's revision No. 34 of 2004 has been dismissed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 5, Varanasi vide judgment dated 4.5.2005, hence this writ petition.
(2.) The basic contention raised by learned Counsel for the petitioner are: (i) The tenant made deposit under section 30 of Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1972") but for the purpose of giving benefit of section 20(4) of Act, 1972, due credit has not been given by Courts below on the ground that deposit was not made validly. This finding by Courts below is wholly illegal. (ii) No valid notice was given to the petitioner determining his tenancy.
(3.) The facts, in brief, giving rise to the dispute in present matter, are as under:;