Judgment

AHMADI, J.:- The short question which arises for our consideration in this

Appeal by special leave is whether a tenant of a premises constructed in 1967 is entitled to the protection of S. 39 of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (Act No. 13 of 1972 as amended by Act No. 17 of 1985), hereinafter called the Act, in an eviction suit instituted before the commencement of the Act. The Act came into force w.e.f. 15th July, 1972 by virtue of the notification issued by the State Government in exercise of power conferred by sub-section (4) of S. 1 of the Act, vide Notification No. 3409 / XXIX-59-72 dated 27th June, 1972 published in the U. P. Government Gazette, Extra, dated 1st July, 1972. The Act was enacted for inter alia regulation of letting and eviction of tenants from certain classes of buildings situate in urban areas specified in sub-section (3) of S. 1. Section 2 indicates the buildings to which the Act shall not apply. We are concerned with sub-section (2) of S. 2, the relevant part whereof reads as under :

"Except as provided in sub-section (5) of S. 12, sub-section ( 1 -A) of S. 21, sub-sec. (2) of S. 24, Sections 24-A, 24-B, 24-C or subsection (3) of S. 29, nothing in this Act shall apply to building during a period of ten years from the date on which its construction is completed".

Since it is not disputed before us that the construction of the suit property was completed in 1967, we need not set out the provisos and the explanations to the sub-section.

2. Section 3 defines the various expressions used in the Act. Under clause (a) tenant, in relation to a building means a person by whom its rent is payable and building according to clause (i) means a residential or non-residential roofed structure including any land, garages and out-houses appurtenant thereto. Any person to whom rent is or if the buidling were let, would be, payable, including his agent or attorney or such person, is a landlord within the meaning of clause (j) of that section. It would thus seem that but for the exemption granted by Section 2(2), the provisions of the Act would have applied to the letting of the suit premises. The scheme of Section 2 is that buildings referred to in clauses (a) to (f) are exempt from the operation of the Act for all times (subject of course to legislative changes) whereas the exemption granted by S. 2(2) is for a period of ten years from the date of completion of construction.

3. Chapter III regulates to letting. Section 11 provides that no person shall let any building except in pursuance of an allotment order issued by the District Magistrate under Section 16. Chapter IV regulates eviction. Section 20 inter alia prohibits the institution of a suit for eviction of a tenant from any building except on the grounds catalogued in clauses (a) to (g) of sub-section (2) thereof. Section 21 provides for the eviction of a tenant if the building is bona fide required by the landlord for his own use or the use of any of his family member. The scheme of Chapters III & IV clearly shows that both the letting of and eviction from the buildings to which the Act applies are regulated by the provisions of the Act.

4. Section 39 of the Act with which we are mainly concerned finds its place in Chapter VII entitled Miscellaneous and Transitional Provisions. That section reads as under :

"Pending suits for eviction relating to building brought under regulation for the first time - In any suit for eviction of a tenant from any building to which the old Act did not apply, pending on the date of commencement of this Act, where the tenant within one month from such date of commencement or from the date of his knowledge of the pendency of the suit, whichever be later, deposits in the court before which the suit is pending, the entire amount of rent and damages for use and occupation (such damages for use and occupation being calculated at the same rate as rent) together with interest thereon at the r