DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.

( 1 ) RULE, made returnable forthwith. Counsel appearing for the Respondent waives service. By consent the matter is taken up for hearing and final disposal.

( 2 ) THE Respondent instituted a suit for eviction against the Petitioner in December 2000 after the provisions of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act 1999 had come into force. Section 3 (1) (b) of the Act provides that the Act shall not apply to any premises let or sublet to banks, any public sector undertaking or corporation established by or under any Central or State Act or to foreign missions, international agencies, multinational companies, and private limited companies and public limited companies having a paid up capital of Rs. 1 Crore or more. The petitioner ceased to have the protection of rent control legislation upon the enactment of the Rent act of 1999.

( 3 ) THE foundation of the suit was that the premises were originally granted on lease to the petitioner by the predecessor-in-title of the respondent on a monthly rent of Rs. 1,200/- and that the lease had expired by efflux of time in 1980. The Respondent claimed to have terminated the tenancy by a notice dated 22nd August, 2000