Sunita Agarwal, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) In the proceedings under Section 20(4) of the Act for eviction of the tenant, both the courts below have recorded that the deposits made by the tenant on 13.2.2007 under Section 30(2) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 are not valid deposits and could not be deducted from the dues which were required to be deposited so as to grant him benefit of Section 20(4) of the Act.
(3.) Admitted facts of the matter are that the petitioner is tenant of the suit property which was initially owned by Smt. Madhubala, mother of the plaintiff Prem Kumar Gupta. Smt. Madhubala died on 15.5.2004. After death of Smt. Madhubala, the rent for the month of April and May 2004 was tendered to Sri Prem Kumar Gupta and rent receipt dated 5.6.2004 was issued by Sri Prem Kumar Gupta. The notice demanding rent and determining the tenancy on the ground of default was issued by the landlord on 5.1.2007 which was admittedly served upon the tenant prior to 19.1.2007 reply to which was given by the tenant on 19.1.2007. After the notice was served upon the tenant, he filed an application under Section 30(2) of the Act which was registered as Misc. Case No. 17 of 2007.;