LAKSHMI NARAIN GUPTA Vs. SHANTI NIGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision under Section 25 Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, against the judgment and decree dated 18.12.2002 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Unnao in S.C.C. Suit No. 4 of 2001, Smt. Shanti Nigam v. Lakshmi Narainan Gupta, decreeing the suit for eviction, arrears of rent and damages in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties on merit at admission stage after summoning the record.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the revisionist has argued that the service of notice is not proved and the presumption under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act as well as under Section 114 of the Evidence Act are rebuttable. It has been argued that the revisionist denied on oath the tender of the registered letter to him by postman and no cross-examination of the revisionist-tenant has been made on this point. I find no force in this contention. THE notice has been served by refusal and by affixation. THE revisionist has been cross-examined. THE finding recorded by the learned trial court is not perverse in any way.