1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. By this Civil Revision Application, the Applicant challenges the order dated 30th September 2013 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Mumbai rejecting the Applicant's Revision Application under section 44 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (MRC Act) in Appeal/Desk/MRCA/ REV/492/2012 upholding the order dated 28th August 2012 passed by the Competent Authority, Konkan Division, Mumbai under the MRC Act rejecting the Application filed by the Applicant for leave to defend case No.2 of 2012 and passing the order directing the Applicant to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises i.e. Flat No.4, ground floor Sweet Home, Shere Punjab Complex, Plot No.286, (CST No.368/1096) adm. 766 sq. yards, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 093 admeasuring area 360 sq.ft. (suit flat) to the Respondent original Applicant and also directing the Applicant to pay sum of Rs.1,23,600/-towards outstanding dues in respect of the suit flat and Rs.31,460/- p.m. from 1st January 2012 till handing over vacant possession of the suit to the Respondent.

2. Few facts of the matter are, as under:

The Respondent original Applicant is owner of the suit premises. By leave and license agreement dated 25th May 2009 he handed over the suit flat to the Applicant for temporary period of 33 months (three blocks of 11 months each) on terms and conditions stated in the leave and license agreement. As the Applicant started using the suit flat for commercial activities and causing nuisance in the building premises, the Respondent issued legal notice dated 18th November 2011 through his Advocate to the Applicant calling upon her to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit flat.

3. In reply to the said legal notice, the Applicant, through her Advocate replied the said notice by letter dated 14th December 2011 and denied the allegations made by the Respondent. As the Applicant failed to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit flat, the Respondent preferred Application No.2 of 2012 before the Competent Authority at Bandra (Konkan Division) under Section 24 of the MRC Act for vacant and peaceful possession of the suit flat along with compensation from the date of expiry of notice dated 18th November 2011 @ Rs.31,460/- pm or any amount which the Competent Authority thinks fit and proper till handing over the suit flat.

4. In the said Application, the Applicant preferred Application dated 17th February 2012 for leave to defend the said matter on the ground that the Respondent himself allowed the Applicant to use the suit flat to carry out commercial activities i.e. Kerala Ayurvedic Treatment Center. She further submits in her Application that the Applicant was ready and willing to pay monthly charges as per the leave and license agreement dated 25th May 2009. The Applicant, in that Application for leave to defend raised objection that though the agreement dated 25th May 2009 styled as leave and license agreement, the actual intention of the parties was to create tenancy in the suit flat. In the said Application she submitted that the Respondent informed the Applicant that the flat being held by the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) it is not possible for him to create and/or execute the tenancy agreement and therefore the tenancy was created in the form of leave and license agreement. In the said Application for leave to defend, the Applicant further stated that being a tenant, the Competent Authority has no jurisdiction under section 24 of the MRC Act to entertain the Application.

5. The Competent Authority, by its order dated 28th August 2012 rejected the Applicant's Application for leave to defend the said proceedings and directed the Applicant to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit flat to the Respondent and also to pay compensation and license fees. The said order was challenged by the Applicant before the Commissioner for Greater Mumbai, Konkan Div