( 1 ) THIS is tenants writ petition. The main question involved in this petition is as to whether the deposits made by tenant-petitioner under Section 30 of U. P, Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) were valid deposit or not. Landlord-respondent filed suit for eviction on the ground of default and for recovery of rent against tenant-petitioner numbered as S. C. C. Suit no. 5 of 1988. In the suit tenant-petitioner pleaded that he had validly deposited the entire prior rent under Section 30 of the Act and subsequently rent was deposited by him in the suit under section 20 (4) of the Act. The trial court/j. S. C. C. , Pilibhit accepted the contention of the tenant-petitioner and held that in view of deposit under Section 30, which was valid and subsequent deposit in the suit itself, the tenant-petitioner was entitled to the benefit of Section 20 (4) of the Act. Accordingly, trial court/j. S. C. C. , Pilibhlt through judgment dated 27. 5. 1989 dismissed the suit of the plaintiff-landlord respondent but permitted him to withdraw the amount deposited by the tenant in the Court. Against the judgment of J. S. C. C. . Pilibhit dismissing the suit on 27. 5.