( 1 ) THIS revision application under sec. 29 (2) of the Bombay Rent Act ordinarily to be dealt with by a Single Judge as per the High Court Appellate Side Rules is before us as the Division Bench because the learned Single Judge A. N. Surti J. felt that the question that was raised before him was of frequent occurrance and of vital importance. The question that was referred to us was whether a notice given by the landlord precedent to the filing of the suit for possession on the ground of non-payment of rent must or must not contain a specific demand of the arrears of rent.

( 2 ) WHEN the matter was called out before us Mr. Adhyaru the learned counsel appearing with Mr. Lathigara the advocate on record raised a preliminary contention that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Maganlal Chhotahhai Desai v. Chandrakant Motilal A. I. R. 1969 S. C. 37 this question could not be raised for the first time before the High Court and Mr. Adhyaru urged that we should deal with the question of tenability of this contention first. Mr. S. M. Shah the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner on the other hand urged that as the learned Single Judge had re