Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.22 seconds)
Balawant Shamrao Deshpande vs Sadashiv Haripant Kulkarni And Ors. on 18 October, 1974 cites

Mahalinga Bandappa vs Venkatesh Waman on 9 October, 1956

9. Shri Joshi submitted that a contrary view has been taken by the High Court of Bombay construing similar provisions of the Bombay Rents. Hotel and Lodging House. Rates Control Act, 1947. He relied upon the decision in Mahalinga Bandappa v. Venkatesh Waman, . The provisions of Part II of that Act were made applicable to Shahapur Municipal District with effect from 4-10-1949 in respect of premises let for residence or education or let to Government or local authority for the purpose of setting up offices or public hospital or dispensary. Therefore, the provisions of Part II of that Act were not applicable to premises let for business, trade or storage. The Shahapur Municipal District merged with Belgaum Municipal Borough and became a part of the Belgaum Municipal Borough by virtue of a notification dated 25th June, 1952. Part II of that Act had been applied to the Belgaum Municipal Borough area with effect from 13-2-1948 in respect of premises let for all purposes including business, trade or storage. The question debated before the High Court of Bombay was, as to whether Part II of that Act, became applicable in respect of premises let for business, trade or storage with effect from 13-2-1948 or with effect from 25-6-1952 in respect of Shahapur Municipal District which became part of the Belgaum Municipal Borough as from 25-6-1952. The High Court of Bombay held that Part II of that Act cannot be regarded as having been in force with effect from 13-2-1948 in respect of premises let for business or trade or storage. They held that the provisions of Part. II in respect of premises let for business, trade or storage would be applicable only with effect from 25-6-1952. When the limits of the Belgaum Municipal Borough were extended by including the area of the Shahapur Municipal District within its limits under the provisions of the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act, 1925, the question as to whether the said extension automatically extends the applicability of the provisions of Part II of that Act which were in force in the Belgaum Municipal Borough before that date was not debated before their Lordships of the Bombay High Court. It was assumed that when the territorial limits of Belgaum Municipal Borough were extended, the provisions of Part II of that Act automatically stood extended without there being any notification issued under the Bombay Rent Control Act extending the provisions of that Act to the newly added area.
Bombay High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 12 - Full Document
1