- (1.) Heard Sri Mohit Kumar, learned counsel for the defendant- revisionist and Sri B.K. Solanki, learned counsel for the plaintiff- respondent.
(2.) Since facts and controversy involved in both the revisions are similar and as such with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, both the revisions are being heard together.
(3.) Learned counsel for the defendant revisionist submits as under: I The building was constructed and assessed before the cut of date i.e. 26.4.1985 under Section 2(2) of The Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Thus the Act was applicable but the court below has committed manifest error of law to record a finding that the Act is not applicable. II The new construction or the new building can be treated as new only if it is assessed separately or subsequently. It is evident on record that no fresh assessment took place and as such the exemption from applicability of the Act shall not be available to the plaintiff-respondent. III Copies of khasra of the municipal corporation as filed in evidence records certain new construction, which is wholly meaningless since no fresh assessment was made subsequent to the first assessment. IV Since there was dispute as to the date of construction, hence the court below should have determined it on the basis of assessment.;