JUDGMENT B.N. Sapru, J. - This is tenant's revision. 2. In a suit for ejectment the tenant's defence was struck off. The suit for ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent. The rent has been found to be Rs. 250 per month. The total claim was for Rs. 12,000 as arrears of rent. Which has been decreed. 3. The learned Counsel for the applicant argues that the shop is not a new construction and no evidence as required by Explanation I to Section 2(2) is to be produced by the landlord. After the defence of the tenant has been struck off, there was only the plaintiff's version that the building was a new construction to which the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 did not apply, before the Court which was accepted by the Trial Court. 4. In any case, the tenant was in arrears of rent for more than four months which was not paid nor deposited despite service of notice of demand and consequently even under U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 the tenant was liable to eviction. 5. In the result I find that the revision has no merits which is accordingly dismissed. 6. The decree for eviction shall not be put in execution for three months provided within the period of one month from today's date the applicant deposites a sum of Rs. 6,000 in the execution Court and further deposits the balance of the decretal amount within a further period of one month. The amount so deposited can be withdrawn by the plaintiff-respondent without furnishing any security. In the event of non-compliance the decree for eviction shall become immediately-executable.