Mam Chandra Agarwal, J. - (1.) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the tenant petitioner challenges an order dated 17th July, 1996, passed by the 5th Additional District Judge, Jhansi, whereby he allowed the landlord's revision petition No. 130 of 1992, by setting aside the judgment and decree passed in S.C.C. Suit No. 56 of 1990 and remanded the matter to the trial Court for a fresh decision according to law. I have heard Sri B.N. Agarwal, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Sri R.P. Tewari, learned Counsel for the landlord respondent.
(2.) THE landlord respondent No. 1 filed the aforesaid suit for ejectment of the tenant petitioner from a shop on the ground of default in payment of rent. Summons were issued to the petitioner fixing 17th December, 1990, on which date, he applied for grant of time to file a written statement. In the purported compliance of the provisions of sub -section (4) of Section 20 of the Act, the tenant petitioner deposited the amount of rent etc. on 15th April, 1991, and he filed his written statement on 15th May, 1991. The trial Court relieved the tenant petitioner against his liability for eviction on the ground of default in payment of rent and dismissed the suit. The landlord preferred the aforesaid revision and the learned 5th Additional District Judge, who heard and disposed of the revision petition, held that 17th December, 1990, was the date for the first hearing of the suit and the tenant should have made the deposit in compliance with the provisions of sub -section (4) of Section 20 of the Act by that date. Since the amount was not so deposited and was deposited on 15th April, 1991, the tenant was not entitled to be relieved from the liability of eviction and hence the suit could not be dismissed on that ground. Therefore, allowing the revision petition, the learned District Judge remanded the matter for decision of the suit on the other points involved in the case.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the tenant petitioner contended that in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Advaita Nand v. Judge, Small Causes Court, Meerut and others : 1995 (1) ARC 563, the first hearing under Section 20(4) of the Act means the date on which the Court proposes to apply its mind to determine the points in controversy between the parties to the suit and to frame issues, if necessary, and that a date fixed merely for filing a written statement cannot be the date for first hearing.;