1 LPA153.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.153 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.9239 OF 2010 KJ Mr.Shivaji Tukaram Karale )..Appellant Vs. Mr.Balasaheb Vithal Gade )..Respondent ---- Mr.Chetan Akerkar for the appellant. ---- CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ DATE : 6/7/2011. PC 1 Heard learned Counsel for the appellant. 2 In our view, the impugned order of the learned single Judge needs no interference at our end. The learned single Judge has rightly found that the procedure under Section 24 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act is essentially a summary procedure and therefore, the Competent Court thought it appropriate to 2 LPA153.11.sxw decide all the issues together to avoid further delay. Considering the said fact, the point raised by the appellant is to be decided in the pending proceedings by the trial Court in accordance with law. The learned single Judge has rightly held that all the issues to be decided together in the suit. The learned single Judge also directed the trial Court to decide the proceeding within one year. 3 The trial Judge shall decide all the issues afresh including the question of maintainability of proceeding for want of written agreement of leave and license under the Act and the parties are entitled to lead appropriate evidence in connection with the maintainability before the trial Court. 4 The trial Court shall frame necessary issues and shall ask the parties to lead evidence and decide all the pending issues. 4 Subject to above, Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J) (P.B.MAJMUDAR,J) 3 LPA153.11.sxw