(1.) THE main question involved is whether the L. P. A. is maintainable in the present case.
(2.) THE respondent was allowed to construct two rooms by the appellant by an agreement dated 25th September, 1982 and the same was let out to the respondent. The rent was Rs. 50/ -.
(3.) THE respondent filed Civil Suit No. 2441 of 1987 claiming perpetual injunction against the appellant as he was trying to disturb the possession. However, according to the respondent, he came to be dispossessed during 17th December, 1989 to 19th December, 1989 when he was out of station. Hence, he amended the plaint and prayed for possession. The learned Civil Judge, Junior Division Pune, by order dated 25th September, 1992, held that the appellant was in possession of the premises on the date of the suit, but was dispossessed during the pendency of the suit. But the relief of possession cannot be granted as he had no jurisdiction in view of section 28 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Loding House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 (hereafter referred to as "the Bombay Rent Act") and the contention of the appellant in that respect was accepted. Hence, the suit came to be dismissed.