1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 174 of 2010 ( Tulsiram s/o Jagannath Matte ..vs.. Warundeo s/o Balaji Lakkawar ) =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Shri A.S. Chandurkar, Advocate for the appellant. C ORAM : C.L.PANGARKAR, J. DATED : 27th APRIL, 2010. Heard learned Advocate for the appellant. This second appeal is preferred by the original defendant/tenant. The respondent/landlord had instituted a suit for ejectment of the appellant/tenant after obtaining the permission from the Rent Controller to determine the tenancy. A notice was issued after obtaining the permission for determining the tenancy and the suit came to be filed. The suit was opposed by the defendant/tenant. The trial Court after recording the evidence of the plaintiff found that the plaintiff had determined the tenancy of the defendant rightly and the defendant was, therefore, bound to surrender the possession to 2 the plaintiff. The defendant preferred an appeal before the District Judge. The District Judge had concurred with the findings of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. The learned Advocate for the appellant contends that the first appellate Court ought to have remanded the matter back to the trial Court inasmuch as it was the case of the appellant that he was not given an opportunity to lead evidence in the matter. The submission has no force. The only question that is to be determined is whether the 15 days' clear notice for termination of tenancy has been given or not. Both the Courts have found that 15 days' clear notice had been served upon the defendant and that too after obtaining the permission from the Rent Controller. Therefore, there was no question of matter being remanded back to the trial Court. This question has been rightly decided by the Courts below. No substantial question of law is involved in the present appeal. Therefore, the same is dismissed. JUDGE. adgokar