A.K.Yog, J. - (1.) J. S. C. C. Suit No. 3 of 1981 was filed by Narsingh Das Agrawal (Plaintiff-Respondent No. 3) against Krishna Nand Vishwakarma (Defendant-Petitioner) claiming, inter alia, amongst others, that said plaintiff was owner and landlord of a residential accommodation, (described in the plaint- of said suit filed as Annexure-1 to the counter- affidavit) wherein defendant-petitioner was tenant at the rate of Rs. 12 per month. The defendant having committed default in payment of rent for more than four months, notice under Section 106, Transfer of Property Act (for short called TPA) was sent, which was, admittedly, received by the defendant-petitioner on November 3, 1980. Copies of the notice under Section 106. TPA sent by plaintiff respondent No. 3 and the reply given by the defendant-petitioner against the same have been annexed as Annexures-RA 1 and RA 2 to the rejoinder-affidavit. Annexure-RA 2 is dated December 17, 1980, which is doubtful in view of the averments contained in paragraph 7 of the plaint (Annexure-1 to the counter-affidavit) wherein it is mentioned that plaintiff received reply against notice under Section 106. TPA on December 2, 1980.
(2.) The defendant-tenant contested the said suit by filing written statement (Annexure-2 to the counter-affidavit) and it was admitted that notice under Section 106, TPA was received on November 3, 1980, rent was being paid, but receipts, in lieu thereof, were not issued by the landlord and sometimes landlord refused to receive rent without lawful excuse and that being constrained, defendant had deposited rent by filing an application under Section 30, U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972), for short called 'the Act' which was registered as Rent Case No. 176 of 1980 in the court of Munsif, Ballia. The defendant-tenant further claimed that rent was being deposited under Section 30 of the Act. The defendant-tenant claimed that certain receipts were issued, some of which were with him while some were lost. The defendant-tenant also claimed in paragraph 6 of the written statement that he has filed an application under Section 20 (4) of the Act and entitled to immunity from ejectment under Section 20 (4) of the Act.
(3.) There were two innings before the Court of Judge Small Causes before the matter came up before this Court in present writ petition. initially Judge Small Causes Court vide judgment and order dated April 24. 1981 held that defendant-tenant was entitled to the benefit of deposits under Section 30 of the Act, plaintiff was not entitled to the decree for eviction against the tenant, but only entitled to the entire amount deposited by the defendant both in that Court as well as under Section 30 of the Act. A true copy of the said judgment and order dated April 24, 1981 has been annexed as Annexure-3 to the counter-affidavit.;