S.U.KHAN, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS is tenant's writ petition. Landlord respondent No. 3 Shyam Sunder Agarwal filed S.C.C. Suit No. 29 of 1988 against tenant petitioner for his eviction from the tenanted accommodation and for recovery of arrears of rent @ Rs. 250 per month. Property in dispute is a shop. Suit was dismissed by J.S.C.C./III A.C.J., Mathura, through judgment and decree dated 28.3.1995. Against the said judgment and decree, Civil Revision No. 52 of 1995 was filed. lllrd A.D.J., Mathura, through judgment and order dated 8.10.1996, allowed the revision, set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court and decreed the suit of the plaintiff with cost, hence this writ petition filed by the tenant. Tenancy was created through registered rent deed dated 16.7.1984. Plain­tiff pleaded that shop was new construction, hence U.P. Urban Buildings (Regula­tion of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 was not applicable thereupon. However, tenant pleaded that shop was more than ten years old when suit was filed, hence Act was applicable.
(3.) COPY of the rent deed is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In the said deed, it is mentioned that shop in dispute was constructed in the year 1983 and the Act was not applicable thereupon. Condition No. 2 of the agreement is that tenancy has started w.e.f. 1.7.1984 and in case three months' rent is not paid, tenancy would come to an end automatically. Initially, rent was not paid for June, July and August, 1987, however the same was sent through money-order afterwards which was accepted by the landlord. Thereafter, rent was not paid since February, 1988. Registered notice terminating tenancy was also sent on 4.4.1988. Trial Court held that even though by virtue of non-payment of rent for February, March and April of 1988, tenancy would have terminated but landlord sent notice of termina­tion of tenancy dated 4.4.1988, hence tenancy was not validly terminated.;