SHARANGDHAR PURSHOTTAM KANHARE Vs. SITARAM MAHADEO DABHOKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these three petitioners a common point is raised as to the interpretation of the provisions of sub-section (3-A) of section 13(1)(hh) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).

(2.) A few facts leading to this litigation are as under:

(3.) The petitioner in all the three Special Civil Applications mentioned above, is S.P. Kanhere, who is the owner of a house bearing House No. 759/52, Deccan Gymkhana, Pune. The petitioner wanted to demolish the house and built in its place a new building. He, therefore, got prepared necessary plans of the proposed building and got the same sanctioned from the Municipal Corporation, Pune, on or about August 21, 1971. He then approached the Tribunal constituted under sub-section (3-B) of section 13 of the Bombay Rent Act and obtained from the Tribunal the necessary certificate on December 14, 1971. He then gave notices to all the other tenants of the said building on January 3, 1972 terminating their tenancies alleging therein that he reasonably and bona fide required the said premises in dispute for the immediate purpose of demolishing then and that such a demolition was to be made for the purpose of erecting a new building on the premises sought to be demolished. All the tenancies were terminated by the end of January 31, 1972.