VIKAS EKNATH THENG Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Additional Collector, Amravati in Revenue Appeal No.56/71(2)/93-94 of Amravati. The facts that are material and relevant for deciding this petition are as under :

(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that permission has been granted by the Appellate Authority under clauses 13(3)(v)(vi) and (vii) without there being any evidence placed on record by the respondent-Land lord. It is submitted that the case of the respondent-Landlord was that it needs the premises for its own occupation. However, there is no evidence on record to show that it has the resources to develop the property. However, there is no evidence placed on record to show as to what is the present activity carried out in the premises, how much area is required and how much more area is required. The case of the Landlord was that the petitioner has acquired alternate accommodation. But there is no documentary evidence placed on record to show the same. Same is the case in relation to the case of the Land Lord that the house is in dilapidated condition and therefore, it cannot be repaired unless the tenant vacates the same. There is no evidence placed on record by the Land lord. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that there is no oral evidence lead by the Trust in support of its case. The learned counsel also submitted that the matter should be remanded back to the Authorities below so that the Land lord can lead documentary evidence on record, as also oral evidence.

(3.) PERUSAL of the order of the Appellate Authority shows that the Appellate Authority has made general observations and has not really indicated as to why the findings recorded by the Rent Controller are liable to be set aside. In my opinion, it was the duty of the Appellate Authority to refer to each of the findings of the Rent Controller and then to indicate what is the infirmity in each of the findings and then only set aside the findings. Perusal of order of the Appellate Authority shows that no reason whatsoever is given for setting aside the findings recorded by the Rent Controller. In my opinion, the order passed by the Appellate Authority suffers from total non-application of mind. The order, therefore, violates the principles of natural justice.