(1.) The petitioner-landlord's challenge is restricted to portion of the impugned order as the Appellate Court rejected his application to inspect the premises with an architect.
(2.) The petitioner/ landlord, as the respond enttenant not permitting him to inspect the premises though prior notice was given, moved this application under section 28 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the Act' for short). The Appellate Court however, by impugned order observed as under :
(3.) The result of this, that the landlord's application was rejected mainly because he wanted to inspect the premises with an architect. Considering the scheme and object of the Act and specially section 28 which is reproduced here under :