IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 459 OF 200 WRIT PETITION NO. 459 OF 200 WRIT PETITION NO. 459 OF 2007 Gangabai Shankarrao Methe.... Petitioner versus Suryakant Bhairavnath Korde...... Respondent. through legal heirs. Shri A.B. Borkar forthe petitioner CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED; 4TH JULY, 2007 DATED; 4TH JULY, 2007 DATED; 4TH JULY, 2007 P.C.; P.C.; P.C.; 1. The present writ petition is filed by the original defendant, who is in possession of the tenanted premises regulated by Bombay Rent Act. The trial court decreed the suit and during pendency of an appeal filed by the present petitioner, the Bombay Rent Act came to be repealed by the Maharashtra Rent Control Act 1999. In view of the repeal of the Bombay Rent Act, the petitioner moved an application seeking to amend the writ petition and raised a contention that under the new act acquisition of alternative accommodation is not a ground for eviction. In substance the submission before the first Appellate Court, in support of the amendment application was that the proceeding need to be regulated by the provision of Maharashtra Rent Control Act. The rejection of the said application has given raise to filing of this writ petition. 2. Section 58 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act deals with repeal and saving. Sub section 2 of section 58 reads thus: (2) Notwithstanding such repeal- (a) (2) Notwithstanding such repeal- (a) (2) Notwithstanding such repeal- (a) All applications, suits, and other proceedings All applications, suits, and other proceedings All applications, suits, and other proceedings under the said Acts pending, on the date of under the said Acts pending, on the date of under the said Acts pending, on the date of commencement of this Act before any court, commencement of this Act before any court, commencement of this Act before any court, controller, competent authority, or other controller, competent authority, or other controller, competent authority, or other office or authority shall be continued and office or authority shall be continued and office or authority shall be continued and disposed of in accordance with the provisions disposed of in accordance with the provisions disposed of in accordance with the provisions of the Acts, so repealed, as if the said acts of the Acts, so repealed, as if the said acts of the Acts, so repealed, as if the said acts had continued in force and this Act had not had continued in force and this Act had not had continued in force and this Act had not been passed." been passed." been passed." Sub section 2(b) further clarifies Sub section 2(b) further clarifies Sub section 2(b) further clarifies that: that: that: the provisions for appeal under the Acts so the provisions for appeal under the Acts so the provisions for appeal under the Acts so repealed shall continue in force in respect of repealed shall continue in force in respect of repealed shall continue in force in respect of applications, suits and proceedings disposed applications, suits and proceedings disposed applications, suits and proceedings disposed of thereunder. of thereunder. of thereunder. 3. It is thus clear that proceedings initiated under Bombay Rent Act need to be continued under the repealed act as if the said act has not been repealed. In this view of the matter the first Appellate court was fully justified in rejecting the application for amendment by holding that the same is sought in order to protract the matter. Hence no interference is called for. Writ petition is thus summarily dismissed. ....