JUDGMENT

R. B. MISRA, J. :— The only question for consideration in this appeal by special leave is whether the deposit of arrears of rent under S. 7C of the United Provinces (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 will save the tenant from the penalty of being evicted for non-payment of rent.

2. The appellant is a tenant of the respondent on a monthly rent of Rs. 6.25 per mensem. He fell into arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 318.75 for the period from Ist October, 1959 to 31st December, 1963. The tenant did not pay the aforesaid amount in spite of the verbal demand. Consequently, the landlord served upon the tenant a notice of demand. The tenant, however, failed to comply with the said notice, hence he became a defaulter. The landlord thereafter served another notice on the tenant under S. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The tenant, however, neither vacated the premises nor cleared the arrears of rent. The landlord was, therefore, obliged to file a suit. He, however, claimed a sum of Rs. 176.68 as arrears of rent for the period from Ist October, 1961 to 8th February, 1964 the claim for rent for the remaining period having become barred by time. He also claimed a sum of Rs. 58.23 as damages for the period from 9th February, 1964 to 22nd October, 1964 as also pendente lite and future damages at the rate of Rs. 6.25 per mensem.

3. The claim was resisted by the tenant on the ground that he was not a defaulter inasmuch as whatever rent was tendered to the landlord he refused to accept the same and, therefore, he was constrained to deposit the amount, that is, a sum of Rs. 231.25 for the period from Ist September, 1961 to 30th September, 1964 in the Court under S. 7C of the Act. He also disputed the date of tenancy as alleged by the respondent-landlord.

4. The trial court came to the conclusion that the defendant became a tenant from 17th January, 1962 and not from 1959, as alleged in the plaint. As the deposit of arrears of rent by the tenant under S. 7C was not a valid deposit, therefore, it could not absolve the liability of the tenant from eviction inasmuch as the defendant had failed to establish that the landlord had refused to accept the tender made by the tenant. Accordingly, the suit for recovery of arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 154/- and damages amounting to Rs. 58.23 was decreed with pendente lite and future mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 6.25 per mensem.

5. On appeal the learned Addl. Civil Judge reversed the finding of the trial court and held that the tenant was not a defaulter on account of the deposit made by him under S. 7C of the said Act and set aside the judgment and decree of the trial court for eviction. In second appeal the High Court set aside the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court as regards eviction and restored the decree of the trial court. The tenant has now come in appeal to this Court as stated earlier, by special leave.

6. Shri R. K. Jain appearing for the appellant has contended that if the arrears of rent had been deposited with permission of the court under S. 7C of the Act it will be presumed that the landlord had refused to accept the rent tendered by the tenant. As a second limb to this argument it was contended that it was not open to the Court in a suit for eviction to go into the question of validity of the deposit made under S. 7C. He produced a certified copy of the order of the Munsif, City, Kanpur dated 30th July, 1962 allowing the application made by the tenant for permission to deposit the arrears of rent. The order reads :

"This is an application under S. 7C(1) of the U.P. Act III of 1947. The opp. party was served with the notice, No objection filed. The case falls under S. 7C(1) the ingredients of which are made out. Hence the applicant-tenant is allowed to deposit rent in this Court regularly under S. 7C(1) and the opp. Party-landlord is entitled to withdraw. the money."

On the strength of this order it was strenuously contended by Shri Jain that no objec