JUDGMENT - DAGA V.C., J.: - Rule returnable forthwith by consent of parties. Respondent No. 1 is a formal party, whereas Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 waives service.

2. Heard Counsels for the rival parties. Perused record of the petition.

3. This petition is directed against the order dated 7th November, 2003 whereby the revision filed by the applicant licensor (respondent No. 2) seeking directions against the Competent Authority to decide his claim for compensation and damages on merits after due inquiry came to be allowed.

4. The challenge set up in the petition is that the Competent Authority appointed under the provisions of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act") has no jurisdiction to determined the financial liability of the licensee and direct payment thereof under section 42 of the said Act.

Contextual facts :

5. The contextual facts depict that the petitioner, a registered charitable trust, was a licensee of the premises owned by the respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 1 is the revisional authority under section 44 of the said Act.

6. The Leave and Licence Agreement was entered into between the petitioner and respon

Click Here to Read the rest of this document