Revisional interference limited to perverse findings; registered notice carries a presumption of service unless cogently rebutted.

Revisional interference under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 is confined to miscarriage of justice, jurisdictional error, perversity, or findings based on no or inadmissible material, so concurrent findings of fact are ordinarily not disturbed. The tenant failed to prove advance payment, any agreement for adjustment against rent, or tender or deposit of arrears under Section 20(4) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. The landlord's registered notice, acknowledgment receipt, and oral evidence supported service, and the tenant's bare denial did not rebut the presumption of service. The decree for eviction and arrears was sustained, subject to modification on ancillary liability for house tax and water tax.

---

---

Issues: Whether the decree for eviction and arrears of rent called for interference in revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, and whether the tenant had successfully rebutted the presumption of service of the notice of demand and termination.

Analysis: The Court held that revisional interference under Section 25 is confined to cases of miscarriage of justice, jurisdictional error, perversity, or findings based on no material or inadmissible material, and pure findings of fact are ordinarily not to be disturbed. On the merits, the tenant failed to prove the alleged advance payment or any agreement for its adjustment against rent, and also failed to show tender or deposit of arrears in accordance with Section 20(4) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. As to notice, the landlord produced the registered notice, acknowledgment receipt, and supporting oral evidence, while the tenant offered only a bare denial. In view of the settled presumption arising from properly addressed registered post and the absence of cogent rebuttal evidence, the service of notice was held proved and the tenancy validly terminated.

Conclusion: No ground was made out for revisional interference on the findings of default and service of notice, and the decree was therefore sustained, save for the modification on the ancillary liability for house tax and water tax.

Ratio Decidendi: In revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, concurrent or well-supported findings of fact will not be interfered with unless they are perverse or otherwise vitiated, and service of a registered notice is presumed unless the addressee rebuts it by cogent evidence.

---