Pankaj Mithal, J. - (1.) Heard Sri G.D. Mishra, learned counsel for the defendant/revisionist. Sri Siddharth Niranjan has appeared for the plaintiff/respondent.
(2.) This revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 as been preferred against the judgment and order dated 14.7.2016 passed by the Additional District Judge exercising power of the Small Cause Court decreeing SCC Suit No.88 of 2013, Anil Dua alias Titu v. Sanjay Sharma alias Pintu.
(3.) The only argument advanced by learned counsel for the revisionist is that there was no service of notice determining tenancy.;