CHAMAN Vs. IIND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE ETAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE landlord filed a suit before the Judge Small Cause Court for ejectment of the petitioner along with the recovery of arrears of rent and for damages for use and occupation of the premises in question, from the date of the filing of the suit till the actual delivery of possession. The landlord also prayed that a decree of possession be also granted. The petitioner, who is the tenant in the premises in question, contested the suit and contended that he was not a defaulter and that he was not in arrears of rent. The petitioner also claimed benefit of sub-section (4) of Section 20 of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, alleging that he had deposited the entire arrears of rent etc. unconditionally.

(2.) THE trial Court after determining the points in question decreed the suit of the landlord holding that the petitioner was in arrears of rent and that he had failed to pay the same within one month from the date of service of the notice of demand and determining the tenancy. The Judge Small Cause Court further found that the petitioner was not entitled to the benefit of sub- section (4) of Section 20 of the Act as he had not deposited the entire amount.

(3.) HEARD Sri G.R. Jain, the learned counsel for the petitioner. No one appears on behalf of respondents.