PRAKASH KRISHNA,J. - (1.) CHALLENGING the legality and validity of the judgment and decree dated 4-12-1989 passed in SCC suit no. 3 of 1989, the present revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, has been filed by the defendant tenant.
(2.) THE plaintiff opposite parties instituted SCC suit no. 3 of 1989, against the present applicant on the allegations that the plaintiff no. 1 is the owner and landlady of the disputed shop situate in Mohalla Sabitganj District Etawah. By means of a sale deed dated 16-8-1976, the plaintiffs who are the husband and wife, purchased the property in a dilapidated condition. After getting the existing constructions demolished, the present shop was constructed subsequently and was let out for the first time on 31-8-1979, to the defendant Om Prakash, on a monthly rent of Rs. 300/-. The shop was never let out to any other person prior to the aforestated date and the construction was completed in March, 1979. The suit having been filed within 10 years from the date of construction, the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 are not attracted. The suit was contested on the pleas inter alia that the shop in question is a 'new construction' within the meaning of Section 2(2) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 and as such, the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 are applicable thereto. The defendant tenant claimed that the rent has been deposited in misc. case no. 133 of 1986 and, therefore, the defendant is not a defaulter and is not liable for eviction. The benefit of Section 114 of the Transfer of Property Act, was also claimed.
(3.) THE parties led evidence in support of their respective cases. The plaintiffs produced the sale deed dated 16-8-1976 and the deed of tenancy between the parties, carbon copy of notice dated 24-10-1986 etc. In reply, the defendant applicant filed seven documents in the form of rent receipts, receipt of money orders, money orders coupons, copy of tender etc.;