IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.349/2011 RAMKRISHNA SAMUDRE ..VS.. MADANMOHAN DAGA - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : JANUARY 24, 2011. Heard Shri Patil, the learned counsel for the petitioner. By this petition, the petitioner impugns the order passed by the learned trial court on 16.10.2010 deleting the issue as regards comparative hardship. The order impugned does not suffer from any error and appears to be just and proper. The suit was filed by the respondent for eviction and possession under section 16(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act. The respondent had not prayed for possession on the ground of bonafide requirement and the case was not filed under section 16(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act. In such circumstances, the trial court rightly found that the issue of comparative hardship framed as issued no.2 was unnecessary and was not relevant for deciding the lis between the parties. The trial court therefore, rightly deleted the issue of comparative hardship. Since the order passed by the trial court on 16.10.2010 is just and proper, the same cannot be interfered with in exercise writ jurisdiction. The writ petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE SMP