Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—In this revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 the only question which has been raised for consideration by the parties is as to the validity of the notice dated 27.8.2005 by which the lease/tenancy is said to have been determined under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

2. The suit of the landlady against the tenant for his eviction and for recovery of certain rent due has been decreed by the Small Cause Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 25.8.2012.

3. The Court below in deciding issue No. 3, held the notice to be valid and duly served. A finding has also been returned that the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 are not applicable to the said shop and that the tenant has defaulted in payment of rent w.e.f. 14.2.2005.

4. I have heard Sri J.J.Munir, learned counsel for the defendant/revisionist and Sri Pankaj Agarwal, learned counsel for the plaintiff/respondents.

5. In view of the involvement of the above question only, they have agreed for final disposal of the revision on the basis of the impugned judgment and order itself and the copy of the notice which has been annexed with the sta