OM PRAKASH BANSAL Vs. BAL KISHAN GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A. R. Singh, J. Heard Shri Manoj Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri N. K. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) PRESENT appeal has been filed by the plaintiff - landlord for setting aside the judgment of the lower appellate Court dated 12. 2. 88 passed in Civil Appeal No. 61 of 1986 whereby the decree passed by the trial Court in favour of the appellant in original suit No. 382 of 1974 was set aside.

(3.) THE present appeal has been filed by the plaintiff-appellant on various grounds. However, Shri Manoj Gupta, learned counsel has confined his argu ments only on the questions relating to the protection of the provision of Section 29-A of U. P. Act 13 of 1972. On 3-11-88 this appeal was admitted on three questions of law. THE questions on which appeal was admitted are as follows: - (a) Whether the lower appellate court was right in reversing the decree of the trial court on the view that the defen dant- respondent was entitled to the benefit of Section 29-A of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972? (b) Whether the lower appellate court was justified in reversing the decree of the trial court without adverting to the evidence on record and without setting aside the findings of the trial court special-ly on issue Nos. 7, 8, 9, and 10? (c) Whether the benefit of Section 29-A of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 could be given even in the absence of non-com pliance of the mandatory provisions there of?