1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 549/2009 (Vasant Rambhau Karale Vs. Leeladhar Shivrampant Alsapurkar through L.Rs.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. C.S. Kaptan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. V.M. Deshpande, Advocate, for the respondent. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : JUNE 24 , 2009 . Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgments dated 2/5/2002 and 11/3/2008. Both the Courts have concurrently held that the respondent-landlord was entitled to grant of possession of the suit property under the provisions of Section 15 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act 1999. Both the Courts have rightly held that the notice issued by the respondent-landlord was in conformity with the provisions of Section 15(2) of the Act of 1999 and it was not necessary for the respondent-landlord to terminate the tenancy of the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of Section 106 (1) of the Transfer of Property Act. Since the findings recorded by both the Court are pure findings of facts, based on a proper appreciation of the material on record including the relevant provisions of law, the same cannot be interfered with in 2 exercise of the extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The submissions made on behalf of the petitioner that the notice issued under Section 15(2) of the Act of 1999 did not terminate the tenancy as required under the provisions of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, is liable to be rejected for the reasons recorded in the order passed by this Court on 9th of June, 2009 in Writ Petition No. 650/2009. The petition is devoid of merits and is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE RMP