Sudhir Chandra Verma, J. - (1.) THIS Revision under Section 25 of the Small Cause Court Act is directed against the judgment and order dated 1.7.1991 passed in SCC Suit No. 94 of 1987 whereby the plaintiffs' suit for arrears of rent and ejectment has been decreed as also for recovery of mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 320/ - per month. The plaintiffs Sri Kulwant Rai Puri, Sri Vijai Puri, and Dr. (Smt.) Aruna Kapur, claimed to be co -owners and landlords of the premises No. 7, Sarojni Naidu Marg, Husainganj, Lucknow and the defendant Ram Lal Yadav and another were the tenant at monthly rent of Rs. 320/ - in respect of a portion on the ground floor consisting of one room, one kitchen, one bathroom and one room and a store on the mezzanine floor. The defendants fell into arrears of rent from 1.5.1985 to 30.9.1987, amounting to Rs. 9280/ - which was not paid despite service of notice of demand and ejectment dated 9.10.1987, which was served on 16.10.1987. The defendants contested the suit on the ground that the suit is bad for non -joinder of the parties inasmuch as one of the co -landlord Ravi Bhushan Puri has not been arrayed as plaintiff -landlord. The defendants further pleaded that on 26.11.1985 they received notice from Sri Ravi Bhushan Puri requesting them to pay the rent who claimed to be co -owner of the accommodation. The defendants have replied to the demand notice and expressed their willingness to pay the rent to the plaintiffs, if they proved through documents the title in respect of the disputed accommodation. As the plaintiffs -revisionists failed to prove their title, they filed an application for deposit of rent on 9.11.1987 in Misc. Case No. 244 of 1987 and deposited the rent amounting to Rs. 9920/ - in the Court of Munsif South, Lucknow under Section 30(2) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 on 23.11.1987.
(2.) THE defendants also pleaded that Sri Ravi Bhushan Puri, had filed two suits being Original Suit No. 151 of 1986 in the Court of Civil Judge, Lucknow and Original Suit No. 56 of 1988 in the Court of Munsif South, Lucknow in respect of the disputed accommodation and both were pending. The defendants also alleged that on 22.12.1987, they unconditionally tendered the rent as contemplated under Section 20(4) of the Act at the first hearing of the suit. A replication was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs on 23.5.1988 in which it was pleaded that Bishan Ji Puri had executed a registered Will deed dated 16.8.1982, on the basis of which the rent became payable to the plaintiff No. 1 being one of the heir and sole executor of the Will. The execution of the Will was in the knowledge of the defendants and this fact is also established from para 7 of the plaint dated 5/27.1.1988 of Regular Suit No. 56 of 1988. The plaintiffs denied the notice dated 26.11.1985 given by Sri Ravi Bhushan Puri to the defendants. The plaintiffs further pleaded that Ravi Bhushan Puri had mortgaged his entire one -third share in the property with possession to the plaintiff No. 2 by registered mortgage deed dated 24.5.1985. The deposit of rent by defendants under Section 30(2) of the Act was illegal and invalid on 23.11.1987 which was much after the receipt of the notice dated 9.10.1987. The plaintiffs admitted the pendency of the suit filed by Sri Ravi Bhushan Puri being suit No. 151 of 1986. The deposits made under Section 20(4) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 were alleged to be short and insufficient.
(3.) THE defendants filed Additional Written Statement and it was stated that after the death of the ex -landlord they tried to give rent to the plaintiff No. 1. The defendants denied the notice of the Will dated 16.8.1982. and mortgage deed dated 24.5.1985.;