RAJANI S MAINAK Vs. LILABAI HARIBHAU JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Second Appeal has been preferred against the decision of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Karjat, dated 3rd March, 1986 and the judgment of the Additional District Judge, Raigad in Civil Appeal No.50 of 1986. The substantial question of law which arises in the present Second Appeal is whether the notification making the provisions of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging, House Rates Control Act, 1947, (for short "the Bombay Rent Act"), applicable to Karjat Village covers the case of the appellants, who are the tenants, in the suit premises, which are used for both residential and business purposes.

(2.) The Suit was filed by the respondent, who owned a house property bearing No.238 at Bhisegaon in the Group Grampanchayat, Karjat. The defendants were the tenants in the suit property. The plaintiff claimed that she is entitled to recover possession of the suit premises under the Transfer of Property Act since the defendants were in arrears of rent.

(3.) The defendants filed a written statement contending that they were living in the premises and also running a "hotel" during the day. Evidence was led and the Suit was decreed. The trial Court did not accept the contention of the defendants that the tenancy was governed by the provisions of the Bombay Rent Act, in view of the notification issued by the Government of Maharashtra under the Act on 18th April, 1961. The trial Court further held that since the suit premises were used both for residential and business purposes, the notification issued under the Bombay Rent Act would not be applicable to the present case. The submissions of the appellants herein were rejected in view of the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Baburao Raghunath Bagwade Vs. Chandulal Hiralal Shah,1975 77 BLR 197.