Present petition is filed assailing the judgment and order dated 30.10.2006 passed by learned District Judge, Haridwar in SCC Revision No. 28 of 2004 whereby Revisional Court was pleased to allow the revision filed by tenant respondent, herein and was further pleased to dismiss the suit for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent.

2. Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that petitioner namely Swami Beli Ram Udasin Ashram, Kankhal, is a registered society registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, of which petitioner No. 2 Mahant Somdas is the Manager; respondent was inducted in the property - shop, in question, as tenant at the rent of Rs. 12.50 per month; plaintiffs/landlord petitioners, herein, issued one notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (hereinafter referred to as T.P. Act) to the tenant respondent, herein, on 03.02.1998 vide registered letter AD informing the tenant that their tenancy would stand determined/terminated, on expiry of 30 days from the date of receipt of notice and calling the tenant respondent, herein, to vacate the property and hand over the peaceful, vacant possession of the property to the landlord plaintiffs petitioners, herein, after expiry of 30 days from the date of receipt of notice; further calling the tenants to pay arrears of rent to the plaintiffs with effect from 01.07.1997 to 31.01.1998.

3. Undisputedly, notice under Section 106 of the T.P. Act was received by the tenant - respondent on 06.02.1998, however, defendant tenant failed to hand over the peaceful vacant possession of the property, in question, to the plaintiffs landlord, after expiry of 30 days from the date of receipt of notice and further failed to pay arrears of rent, as demanded by the landlord, therefore, plaintiffs were compelled to file SCC Suit No. 23 of 1998 in the court of JSCC Civil Judge (JD), Haridwar. In the written statement, defendants respondent herein, did not deny the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. The only plea taken by the defendants in the written statement was that rent receipts were being issued in favour of M/s Hukam Chand Surendra Kumar a partnership firm, therefore, firm was tenant and firm had not been impleaded as party in the suit, therefore, suit for eviction against the defendants was not maintainable. It was further stated in the written statement that although, plaintiff No. 1 is a registered Society, however, Society is not doing any religious or charitable work, therefore, could not be said to be a religious or charitable society.

4. Learned trial court vide judgment and decree dated 29.11.2004 was pleased to decree the suit filed by the landlord plaintiffs petitioners, herein, directing the tenant defendants respondent, herein, to handover the peaceful, vacant possession of the property, in question, to the landlord plaintiffs petitioners within 30 days from the date of judgment. Feeling aggrieved, defendants respondent, herein, preferred SCC Revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act before District Judge, Haridwar being SCC Revision No.28 of 2004, which was allowed by the Revisional Court vide judgment dated 30.10.2006. Feeling aggrieved, landlord petitioners, herein, have approached this Court by way of filing present petition.

5. I have heard Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Rishik Lakhera and Mr. Pratool Kumar, Advocates for the petitioner and Mr. Siddharath Sah, Advocate for the respondent No. 2 and have carefully perused the record.

6. Tenant respondent, herein, does not dispute that petitioner No. 1 is a society, registered under the provisions of Societies Registration Act.

7. Section 2 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'U.P. Rent Act') reads as under:

' Section 2- Exemptions from operation of Act:

(1) Nothing in this Act shall apply to [the following namely]:

(a) any bui