Heard Sri S. P. Srivastava for the Appellant and Sri S. Dhawan for the respondent.

The matter relates to tenancy, The suit was filed against the present appellant for his ejectment as tenant On the basis that the disputed accom modation was a part 1950 construction and the defendant was liable to ejectment as his tenancy had been terminated. Default was also alleged in the alternative. The learned trial court decreed the suit for ejectment holding that the disputed constructions were not covered by the provisions of U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947.

An appaal was filed by the tenant. During the pendency of the appeal the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 was enforced from 15th July, 1972. An applica tion was moved by the tenant before the Court below on 14th August, 1972, i. e. which one month of the commencement of the Act along with a deposit claiming the benefit of Section 39 of the later Act. Accord ing to the defendant he had deposited the entire rent, costs, mesne profits and interest at the rate of 9% per annum in respect of arrears. He had also claimed that after the notice for ejectment was gi