- (1.) This writ petition is directed against the judgement of the Judge Small Causes Court dated 27.3.1998 whereby the suit for ejectment against the petitioner was decreed and the order of the revisional court dated 3.11.1998 dismissing the revision against the aforesaid judgement.
(2.) The land lord-respondents no. 3 and 4 filed suit no./ 380 of 1983, Smt.Shanti Devi and others Vs. Ayodhya Nath Dubey and another, against the petitioner and one Vishwanath for recovery of arrears of rent , ejectment ;and damages on the allegation that the petitioner was their tenant. He was in arrears of rent for the period 25.8.1977 to 24.2.1983 . The plaintiff-respondents sent com;posite notice on 3.3.1983 to the defendant-petitioner demanding arrears of rent and terminating his tenancy. The notice was served by refusal on 10.3.1983, The petitioner did not pay arrears of rent as demanded by the plaintiffs. It was further stated that the petitioner had sub-let the accommodation in question to Anil Kumar, defendant no. 2.
(3.) The petitioner filed written statement. He alleged that the landlords have refused to accept the rent and thereafter he made deposits under section 30 of U.P.Urban Buildings ( Regulation of letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). He denied that he sub-let the disputed accommodation to the defendant no. 2 . He also denied that he received any notice sent by the plaintiff-respondents. The trial court recorded a finding that the petitioner was served with a notice but he failed pay; the arrears of rent as demanded by the plaintiffs. The deposits made by himj under section 30 of the Act was invalid. The suit was decreed on these findings. The main thrust of the submission of; the learned counsel for the petitioner is; that the petitioner had deposited the rent under section 30 of the Act and such deposit was illegally held as invalid.;