RAMAKANT RICHHARIYA Vs. TRIBHUWAN JI SINHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act has been filed by the revisionist with a prayer to quash the judgment and order dated 28.11.2015 passed by IIIrd Additional District Judge, Jalaun at Orai in SCC Case No. 7 of 2011 (Tribhuwan Ji Sinha Vs. Ramakant Richhariya).

(2.) Heard Sri H.N. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Vineet Kumar Singh, Advocate learned counsel for the defendant -revisionist and Sri Chaudhary Subhash Kumar, learned counsel for the plaintiff -respondent.

(3.) Learned counsel for the defendant -revisionist submits that the impugned judgment dated 28.11.2015 in SCC Case No. 7 of 2011, has been passed without considering the fact that entire arrears of rent was deposited by the defendant -revisionist in view of the provisions of Section 114 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act'). He further submits that once the entire arrears of rent was deposited at the first hearing of the suit, the Court below should have protected the defendant -revisionist under Section 114 of the Act. Further submission is that it is undisputed that tenancy was oral tenancy on month to month basis and therefore, in case of suit filed for forfeiting the tenancy, the provisions of Section 114 of the Act would come into play in the situation when the entire rent was deposited by the revisionist/tenant. He also submits that the provisions of Section 114 -A of the Act is referable to the provisions of Section 111(g) of the Act while the provisions of Section 114 is not referable to Section 111(g) of the Act and can be invoked by a tenant even in case where a notice under Section 106 of the Act has been issued by the land -lord.