Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—The dispute between the parties in this writ petition is about the possession of a shop which is part of a building having number of shops on the ground floor and a residential accommodation on the first floor situate in Mohalla-Asifganj, Azamgarh.

2. One Radhey Shyam and Ghanshyam Das together vide registered agreement dated 7.3.1962 let out the shop in dispute to Jagdish Prasad, father of the petitioner for a fixed period of 6 years w.e.f. 1.3.1962 on a rent of Rs. 67.50 paise per month.

3. On the death of Radhey Shyam in 1964 a dispute arose between the family members of the Ghanshyam Das and the heirs of Radhey Shyam as to the entitlement to receive rent of the above shop. Therefore, Jagdish Prasad, predecessor in interest of the petitioner filed an interpleader suit No. 101 of 1965 against all of them contending that he is ready and willing to deposit rent in Court and that he should be absolved of the liability to pay the rent to any of them till they settle their dispute regarding entitlement of rent in connection thereto. In the said suit an order was passed on 21.3.1968 permitting Jagdish Prasad to deposit rent in Court subject to his legal rights. The said suit was finally decided on 13.4.1993 in terms of compromises dated 4.9.1991, 26.11.1991 and 22.3.1993.

4. The aforesaid Ghanshyam Das and Chaturbhuj Das, the successor of Radhey Shyam, collectively vide notice dated 28.2.1968 informed the tenant Jagdish Prasad that as the period of lease is expiring, he has no right to continue therein as tenant and should immediately vacate the shop failing which they would be entitle to damages @ Rs. 10/- per day.

5. Jagdish Prasad, the predecessor in interest of the petitioner, and after him petitioner himself continued to be in occupation of the shop even after the expiry of the period of lease stipulated in the agreement had expired.

6. In the meantime on 21.8.1972 Ghanshyam Das also died. He was succeeded by his sons Vijay Krishna and Gopal Krishna. One of his sons, Vijay Krishna on the basis of the notice dated 28.2.1968 instituted a civil suit No. 302 of 1975, Vijay Krishna v. Jagdish Prasad, in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Azamgarh for possession over the shop in dispute and for damages @ Rs. 100/- per month contending that his father Ghanshyam Das and uncle Radhey Shyam had let out the shop in dispute for a period of six years under the agreement dated 7.3.1962 @ Rs. 67.50 paise per month and that the period of lease has expired but despite notice dated 28.2.1968 its possession has not been handed over though pursuant to the order in the interpleader suit Jagdish Prasad is continuously depositing the rent.

7. Learned counsel who was appearing for Vijay Krishna in the said suit accepted that the Civil Court lacked jurisdiction to try the suit and that it is cognizable by Small Causes Court. Accordingly, on issue No. 5 regarding jurisdiction of the Court, the plaint was ordered to be returned vide order dated 6.10.1979 for presentation before the appropriate Court.

8. The plaint on return was re-presented on 3.5.1993 before the Small Causes Court and was registered as SCC Suit No. 16 of 1993.

9. The aforesaid suit after contest was dismissed by the Small Causes Court vide judgment and order dated 13.9.1996. The Court held that the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter the Rent Act for short) are applicable to the shop; petitioner is a tenant having succeeded his father who was lawfully inducted as a tenant; the suit is bad for non-joinder of the other co-owners; and that it is barred by Section 20 of the Rent Act.

10. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the suit by the Small Causes Court, the respondent Vijay Krishna filed SCC Revision No. 267 of 1996. The said revision has been allowed by the impugned judgment and order dated 15.5.2013. The judgment and order of the Court below has been set aside and the suit for eviction of the petitioner from the shop in dispute has