1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 4205/2010. Dr.Santosh Trilokchand Dhamecha -: VERSUS :- Smt. Meera Moreshwar Khorgade Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 27, 2010. Heard Shri A.S. Chandurkar, learned Counsel for petitioner and Shri Kotwal, learned Counsel for respondent. The dispute pertains to determination of fair rent and tenant is before this Court challenging the concurrent judgments. His initial rent fixed about 18 years back at Rs.400/- per month has been hiked to Rs. 1800/- per month. The Corporation Taxes then payable on entire premises was Rs. 1842/- and it is an admitted position that the same is now increased to Rs. 4592/- per year. Shri Chandurkar, learned Counsel has contended that the adjacent premises being used for commercial 2 purposes having more area were also subjected to similar litigation and standard rent in relation to those have been fixed at Rs. 1050/- per month. He contends that the landlady has accepted that determination and has issued notice for termination of tenancy on its basis. He has further contended that the equation applied by the Courts below to determine the standard rent is not in accordance with law. Shri Kotwal, learned counsel has contended that the equation applied is in the light of the provisions of Section 12 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act. He further states that adjacent premises were let out much later and determination of rent at Rs.1050/- per month was not accepted by the landlady. He further argues that the concurrent findings are being assailed in present matter. The proceedings filed before this Court are labeled as Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Sole respondent is landlady. Contentions above show that comparison is being made with adjacent bigger premises. Landlady has stated that, that determination is not accepted by her and if the appeal filed by the tenant is registered, objection in that respect. Perusal of both the orders show that entire material which has been produced by the parties has been 3 look into by the Courts below and concurrent findings have been reached. The four times revision in standard rent is supported by the similar increase in Corporation Taxes. There is no jurisdictional error or perversity. Petition is therefore, rejected. No costs. JUDGE Rgd.