JUDGMENT Hon'ble Anil Kumar, J. - Heard Sri R.P. Shukla and Sri Gaurav Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner,? learned Standing Counsel for opposite parties no. 1 and 2 and Sri G.S. Sinha, learned counsel for opposite party no.3. By means of present writ petition , the petitioner has challenged the order dated 8.5.1997 passed by Civil Judge ( Senior Division) Pratapgarh in SCC Suit No. 6 of 1996 ( Shanti Swaroop Khandelwal Vs. Lalta Prasad Swarnkar) and also the order dated 29.10.2009 passed by Additional District Judge, Court no.4, Pratapgarh in SCC Revision No. 3 of 1997 ( Lalta Prasad Swarnkar Vs. Shanti Swaroop Khadelwal). 2. In the city of Pratapgarh, there is a house no.25 ? situated? in Makanduganj, Pergana and Tehsil Pratapgarh which is owned by opposite party no.3 ( Shanti Swaroop Khandelwal), the same was given for rent to Sri Lalta Prasad Swarankar. In respect to the same , respondent no.3 Shanti Swaroop Khandelwal landlord filed a suit for arrears of rent, damages and ejectment under Section 25 of Small Causes Court Act 1884 registered as SCC Suit no. 6 of 1996, allowed vide order dated 8.5.1997 by opposite party no.2. 3. Aggrieved by the same , petitioner filed SCC Revision no. 3 of 1997, dismissed vide order dated 29.10.2009 by opposite party no.1 , hence the present revision has been filed before this Court. 4. At the outset, Sri G.C. Sinha , learned counsel for the respondent no.3 / landlord submits that in view of the proviso? as provided? under sub-section (4) of Section 20 of the U.P. Urban Buildings ( Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972? which is quoted as under:- "(4) In any suit for eviction on the ground mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (2) if at the first hearing of the suit the tenant unconditionally pays or [ tenders to the landlord or deposits in Court] the entire amount of rent and damages? for use and? occupation of the building due from him( such damages for use and occupation being calculated? at the same rate as rent) together with interest thereon at the rate? of nine percent per annum and the landlord's cost of the suit in respect thereof, after deducting? for use and? occupation of the building due from him( such damages for use and occupation being calculated? at the same rate as rent) together with interest thereon at the rate? of nine percent per annum and the landlord's cost of the suit in respect thereof, after deducting? therefrom any amount already deposited by the tenant under sub-section (1) of Section 30, the Court may, in lieu of passing a decree for eviction on that ground , pass an order? relieving the tenant against? his liability for eviction on that ground: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply in relation to a tenant who or any member of whose family has built or has otherwise acquired in a vacant state, or has got vacated? after acquisition, any residential building in the same city, municipality notified are or town area." 5. In view of the above, the petitioner is? not entitled to? restrain the premises in question? as the dauther-in law,Dropadi Soni wife of Shiv Kumar Soni , who is residing? with the petitioner? has built a house? in the same city . In this regard , he rely on the averments made in para -8 of the counter affidavit? filed on behalf of opposite party no.3 in which it has been stated as under:- " At this stage, it is made clear that petitioner, who is doing gold smith business has earned lot of money in last 25 years and he has not even purchased and very valuable land in Mohalla Achalpur but has also built a palatial house in Mohalla Achalpur which was numbered? as House No. 98. The copy of the abstract of entries of Municipal Board record is hereby filed as Annexure No. CA-1 to this Court affidavit. This Khatauni reveals that the petitioner got the house constructed in the name of his daughter-in-law Smt. Draupati Soni wife of Shiv Kumar Soni who is son of the petitioner . The petitioner himself is living alogwith his son, his wife and daughter in law? in the said house and accordingly his name has been recorded in the voter list of Ward no.8 Achalpur, Town & District? Pratapgarh at Sl. no. 991-994. The copy of abstract of the voter list of Achalpur ward is hereby filed as Annexure no. CA-2 to this Counter Affidavit. in the said house and accordingly his name has been recorded in the voter list of Ward no.8 Achalpur, Town & District? Pratapgarh at Sl. no. 991-994. The copy of abstract of the voter list of Achalpur ward is hereby filed as Annexure no. CA-2 to this Counter Affidavit. The petitioner has a flourishing family and he is residing in the said self built house is also depicted from the functions carried out by him at his house in mohalla Achalpur and the copy of invitation card circulated by the petitioner? for birth day celebration his grand son is hereby filed as Annexure No. CA-3 to? this counter affidavit." 6. He further submits that in case the petitioner undertakes to evict the house in question, which is under his tenancy ,within the statutory period? then in that circumstances as the instructions received to him , his client is ready to forgo? the amount as decreed by the court below. 7. Sri R.P. Shukla and Sri Gaurav Mishra, learned counsel? appearing on behalf of landlord /petitioner does not disputed the above said? request which has been made by learned counsel for respondents. 8. Without entering into the factual matrix of the case , the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner ( Lalta Prasad Swarnkar) shall evict the premises in question by 30th June, 2011 and shall handed over the possession of the premises in question peacefully to landlord/ opposite party no.3 . Further , the decreetal amount/damages as awarded by the court below will not be recovered from the petitioner/tenant by the landlord/ opposite party no.3. 9. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is finally disposed of.