( 1 ) THE present petitioner challenged the impugned order dated 28-07- 2005 in Civil Appeal No. 632 of 2004. Some of the material facts of the present case in brief are as under:

( 2 ) THE respondent landlord has filed a suit in the Court of Small Causes at Pune being Civil Suit No. 366 of 2003 under the provision of Provincial Small Causes Court Act by relying upon the provision of Sec. 3 (1) (b) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The respondent has filed the reply and raised the contention that they are not covered by the provision of Sec. 3 (1) (b) of the Maharashtra rent Control Act, 1999. The petitioner herein is a Co-operative Bank known as Pune Zilla madhyawarti Sahakari Bank. Admittedly, the share capital of the bank is more than Rs. One crore. Respondent has filed the suit on the basis that the petitioner being a bank and having share capital of more than Rs. One crore is not covered by the protection conferred under the maharashtra Rent Control Act by virtue of exemption provided under Sec. 3 (1) (b) of the act. It is the case of the respondent that, in absence of protection, the tenancy of petitioner bank is governed by Transfer of Property Act and, therefore, ca

Click Here to Read the rest of this document