KAILASH GANGARAM CHANDGUDE Vs. RANJENDRA BALKRISHAN PARHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter was placed on Board on an application for interim relief. However, with the consent of the parties, the main revision itself was taken up for hearing and final disposal.

(2.) On behalf of the applicant, it is contended that the order of the Competent Authority is without jurisdiction in as much as the Competent Authority could not have exercised jurisdiction as Part II-A of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 had not been extended to the area where the suit premises was located. Counsel has drawn my attention to the provisions of sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) of section 2 of the Act. Counsel points out that in the instant case the provision of Part II-A or Part II or all of them could have been extended only by notification in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (3) of section 2 of the Act. It is contended that by Notification dated 8th August, 1958 Part II was extended to Chinchwad Village and thereafter on 21st January, 1993 there is a Notification extending the part to the entire Municipal area. It is pointed out that mere extension of Part II in the absence of Notification extending Part II-A is of no consequence. After hearing Counsel, I am of the opinion that the contention is devoid of any merits.

(3.) The entire matter has to be considered bearing in mind the amendment to the Act brought about by Act Maharashtra 18 of 1987. Sub-section (3) of section 2 before the said amendment read as under :--