Pushpa Gupta vs Subhash Chandra And Another on 10 July, 2019
30. It may also be necessary to advert to the judgment in the case of Ibrat Husain Vs. The IV Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kanpur and others14, for the proposition that the fact whether any bonafide doubt or dispute in respect of the building in question as well as who is entitled to receive rent in respect of the building in question as also the fact whether the person who made the deposit was a tenant would be jurisdictional facts which must exist to entitle the tenant to take recourse to sub-secion (2) of Sec. 30 of the Act, and before issuing notice to the person or person concerned under sub-section (5) of Section 30, the Court would have to satisfy itself as to whether the jurisdictional facts necessary for invocation of sub-section (2) of Section 30 were manifest from the application made by the tenant. The relevant extract from the aforementioned judgment in the case of Ibrat Husain is as follows :-