CHAGLA, C.J.: - This is an application in revision against the decision of the Distriet Judge, North Satara, holding that Explanation (a) to Section (13)(1)(g), Bombay Rents, ; Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, was ultra vires and void; and the learned District Judge came to hold that under the following circumstances.

2. The petitioner is a tenant, and he went to live in the premises as a tenant in 1941. The opponent, who is a landlord, purchased the property on 23-6-1947, and he filed a suit for ejectment against the applicant. One of the grounds urged by him was that he required the premises reasonably and bona fide for his own use and occupation. The learned Judge held the requirements of the landlord established, but came to the conclusion that as the landlord had purchased the property after 1-1-1947, by reason of Explanation (a) to S.13(1)(g), he was not entitled to eject the tenant. Thereupon he dismissed the suit. An appeal Was preferred to the learned District Judge. The learned District Judge confirmed the finding of the trial Court that the landlord required the premises reasonably and bona fide, but came to the conclusion that Explanation (a) to