https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302905 A tenant's entitlement to protection under Section 20(4) of the U.P. Act depended on depositing the admitted dues before the first hearing, and the Court treated the "first hearing" as the first date fixed for the step or proceeding mentioned in the summons. It held that where the tenant appeared through counsel, sought time, and was informed of the dates for filing the written statement and hearing, the purpose of summons was satisfied and could be treated as waived. On those facts, the later plea of non-service failed, the deposit was not timely, and the tenant was not entitled to the statutory benefit. en-us Fri, 07 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Jun 2022 15:28:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302905 A tenant's entitlement to protection under Section 20(4) of the U.P. Act depended on depositing the admitted dues before the first hearing, and the Court treated the "first hearing" as the first date fixed for the step or proceeding mentioned in the summons. It held that where the tenant appeared through counsel, sought time, and was informed of the dates for filing the written statement and hearing, the purpose of summons was satisfied and could be treated as waived. On those facts, the later plea of non-service failed, the deposit was not timely, and the tenant was not entitled to the statutory benefit. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 07 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302905