ORDER

Leave granted.

2. We have heard the learned counsel on both sides. This appeal arises from the order of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court made in Appeal No. 893/92. The facts lying in short compass are stated as under :

3. The appellant is the tenant of the land which is a part of City Survey No. 56, which was sought to be acquired under the Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Act, 1976, (for short, Act ). The super-structure in City Survey No. 56 was in a dilapidated condition. Therefore, the Bombay Housing and Area Development Board had examined the position and decided that a scheme was required to be framed under the Act for reconstruction and thereafter for allotment to the persons in occupation. When the acquisition proceedings were initiated after finalisation of the scheme, notices were given under Section 5-A to the interested persons including the appellant. The appellant had raised the contention that the tenement in which it was carrying on the business was not part of the City Survey No. 56. It is an independent building and, therefore, it is not liable to be demolished for acquisition. Based upon that objection, a report was called for from the Execut