D.C.Srivastava, J. - (1.) This revision under Section 25 of Provincial Small Causes Courts Act has been filed by the defendant challenging a decree for eviction and arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 3,333 together with pendente lite and future mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 300 per day passed against him.
(2.) The plaintiffs opposite parties filed a suit for eviction of the defendant-revisionist alleging that the revisionist was a tenant in the disputed Ahata No. 195, Delhi Road. Meerut Cantt on a monthly rent of Rs. 2,500. The house is not covered by U. P. Act 13 of 1972, inasmuch as rent exceeds Rs. 2,000 per month. A notice of eviction under Section 106, Transfer of Property Act, was given on 10.4.1996, which was received by the revisionist on 11.4.1996. The notice was replied with wrong facts. The arrears of rent was also demanded but neither the rent was paid nor premises was vacated.
(3.) The suit was contested on the ground that the provisions of U. P. Act 13 of 1972, are applicable to the premises in dispute. The notice is invalid. Tenancy has not been determined. Mesne profits have been claimed at excessive rate. It was also pleaded that Amending Act No. 5 of 1995 is not retrospective and, hence, the premises is covered by U. P. Act 13 of 1972. The Amending Act is said to be discriminatory.;