(1.) THIS petition takes exception to an order passed by the Competent Authority, Pune, directing delivery of possession of the licensed premises to the respondents.
(2.) MS. Purohit, learned Counsel for the petitioner, raised before me a twofold submission. Firstly, Ms. Purohit submitted that the application of the respondents is barred under Order 23, Rule 1 of the C. P. C. Alternatively, she submitted that the application must be held to be barred by the provisions of section 31-H of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947. Before I deal with the submission of Ms. Purohit, I would briefly state the factual background.
(3.) UNDER an agreement of leave and licence dated February 4, 1984, the respondents inducted the petitioner in flat No. 9 in building called Manashree Apartments, situate at Fatima Nagar, Pune. The agreement of leave and licence was for a period of 11 months and there is no dispute that the said agreement has come to an end by efflux of time. Initially, the respondents approached the Co-operative Court by filing a dispute under section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 claiming possession of the premises. The petitioner contested the dispute by filing a written statement. It is not necessary to deal with the various contentions raised in the written statement, but suffice it to say that the petitioner challenged the maintainability of the dispute on the ground that the Co-operative Court has no jurisdiction to try the dispute. On December 1, 1994, the respondents made an application for withdrawal of the dispute with a liberty to file appropriate proceedings. The Co-operative Court, however, passed an order permitting only unconditional withdrawal without granting any liberty for institution of fresh proceedings. Thereafter, the respondents filed the present proceedings before the Competent Authority under part 2-A of the Act for recovery of possession. By the impugned order, the Competent Authority has granted the application.