IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 25 OF 2007 CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 25 OF 2007 CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 25 OF 2007 Shri Sidhram Rachappa Nasale ... Petitioner (Org.Defendant No.1) Versus Shri Janak Kanaiyalal Jani & Anr. Respondents (No.1 - org.Plaintif No.2 - org.Deft.No.2) Mr. Surel Shah, Advocate, for the petitioner. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE: 17th April,2008. DATE: 17th April,2008. DATE: 17th April,2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, who is the original defendant No.1. The respondent No.1 filed the suit for recovery of possession of the property situated at Village Hattur, District Solapur. The defendants contended that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit as it should be filed under Section 41 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act. It appears that previously, the present petitioner had filed an application for fixation of standard rent under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act and in that matter, the respondents had taken an objection on the ground that Maharashtra Rent Control Act is not applicable and the concerned Court had accepted the plea of the respondents on the ground that the property is not situated within the Municipal limits of Solapur and the Maharashtra Rent Control Act is not applicable to the property situated within the limits of Hattur Gram Panchayat. On the same ground, the trial Court in the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff rejected the contention of the defendant. Admittedly, the property is situated outside the Municipal limits of Solapur and the Maharashtra Rent Control Act is not applicable to Hattur Gram Panchayat. Therefore, I find no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the trial Court. 2. In the result, the Revision Application stands dismissed. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.)