JUDGMENT A.B. Shrivastava, J. - The short question arising in this revision under SEction 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act is regarding the mode of calculation of interest on the deposit of rent made under Section 20(4) of U.P. Act 13 of 1972. 2. The suit for ejectment of arrears of rent and damages was filed by the plaintiff- opposite party against the defendant-revisionist. Rent in arrears claimed in the suit was Rs. 1557.50 covering the period 1.3.1987 to 17.10.1987. On the first date of hearing when the defendant appeared he deposited a sum of Rs. 3282 covering the amount of arrears of rent and damages from 1.3.1987 to 31.12.1987, with interest @ 9% per annum, and cost of suit and prayed that an order reliving him from the liability for eviction be passed under Section 20(4) of the Act 13 of 1972. The prayer was opposed by the plaintiff on the ground that the amount deposited was not complete in so far as only Rs. 80/-, as against Rs. 165/- due as interest, was deposited. 3. The learned J.S.C.C. accepted the plea of the plaintiff observing that the interest was to be calculated on flat basis on the total amount of rent and damages as due on the date of deposit and not on the basis of the amount falling due every month. He, accordingly, rejected the application under Section 20(4) and decreed the suit for the reliefs claimed. 4. Learned Counsel for both the parties have been heard. 5. The question in controversy is settled by a decision of this Court in Badri Prasad v. VIIIth Additional District Judge, Allahabad and others, reported to 1989(1) ARC 356, to the effect that law does not require the tenant to pay interest on flat rate on entire amount becomes due.In this view of the matter, interest was not required to be deposited at flat rate on the amount of Rs. 2165/- rather on the amount which came to be due at the end of each month starting from 1.3.1987. The sum of Rs. 80/- was, thus, correctly deposited towards interest. The deposit being complete in all other respects, the defendant was entitled to be relieved of the liability of ejectment. The learned JSCC committed illegality in decreeing the suit for ejectment. 6. The revision is, accordingly, allowed. The sum of Rs. 80/- was, thus, correctly deposited towards interest. The deposit being complete in all other respects, the defendant was entitled to be relieved of the liability of ejectment. The learned JSCC committed illegality in decreeing the suit for ejectment. 6. The revision is, accordingly, allowed. The decree for ejectment is set aside and the defendant-revisionist is relieved of the liability to ejectment. The plaintiff-opposite party shall be entitled to withdraw the amount of arrears of rent, damages, interest, costs, deposited under SEction 20(4) of Act 13 of 1972 as well as to rent, if any, for the subsequent period deposited in the Court below. 7. There shall be no order as to costs of this Court.