Hon’ble Rajan Roy, J.—Heard Shri Prabhat Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Gaurav Mehrotra alongwith Shri Kunal Shah, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 3.

2. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders passed by the Prescribed Authority and the revisional authority under the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (For short ‘the Act, 1972'). The petition is by the tenants.

3. Sri Prabhat Kumar learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that on the date of notice the property in dispute was an open land as admitted by the landlord, therefore, the suit would not lie before the SCC Court, it would lie before the regular Civil Court in view of Section 15 read with Schedule-II (State Amendment) of the U.P. Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, as, once it was the case of the opposite party No. 3 herein that the building which had been let out had got demolished, then, the very basis of tenancy had ceased to exist, therefore, the proceedings were essentially for eviction from the open land per se, as such, the competent forum was the Regular Civil Court.

4. The