MAHARASHTRA FOOD INDUSTRIES Vs. KAMALABAI MANIKRAO WATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Gordey, learned Counsel for the applicants and Mr. Bhangde, learned Counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 landlords. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties.

(2.) MR. Gordey, learned Counsel for the applicants, contended that the applicants are the tenants of respondents 1 to 3. The applicant No. 1 is a Partnership Firm running a manufacturing unit, and manufactures bakery items in the tenanted premises. The respondents 1 to 3 filed an application for termination of tenancy of the applicant No. 1 before the Rent Controller, Amravati, seeking permission under Clause 13 (3) (iii) and 13 (3) (vi) of the C. P. and Berar Letting of Premises and Rent Control Order, 1949. Both the parties adduced evidence before the Rent Controller and permission was granted to the respondents 1 to 3 to terminate the tenancy of applicant No. 1 vide order, dated 8-10-1987.

(3.) MR. Gordey, learned Counsel, further contended that the applicant No. 1 preferred an appeal against the order of Rent Controller, which was registered as Revenue Appeal No. 71 (2)/1987-88, and was dismissed vide order, dated 28-4-1988, passed by the Resident Deputy Collector, Amravati.