TARAK PRASAD RAJARAM Vs. VESTA UKARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed again st the judgment and order of the High Court of Gujarat dismissing the appellant's writ petition made under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the validity of the order of the Revenue Courts n dismissing' the appellant's suit , for eviction of respondents.

(2.) Briefly, the facts giving rise to this appeal are:the respondents are tenants of agricultural land which had been let out to them by the appellant's predecessors-in-title. The appellant made applications on behalf of minor Ashok Kumar for the eviction of the respondents on the ground that the agricultural land in dispute was bona fide required by the landlord for his personal cultivation.The appellant pleaded that the land in dispute had been bequethed to him by his maternal grand-mother under a Will and.as such he was the landlord of the disputed land entitled to maintain the applications for eviction of the respondents u/ S. 29 read with S. 31 A of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as applicable to the State of Gujarat. The tenants raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the suit on the ground that the appellant being a transferee of the land from his maternal grand-mother was not entitled to maintain the suit as a landlord u/ S. 31A of the ' Act, inasmuch as he had not inherited the property from his ancestors. The Mamlatdar upheld the preliminary objection and dismissed the eviction suit. On appeal theDistrict Deputy Collector upheld the order ofthe Mamlatdar. The appellant preferred revision application before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal at Ahmedabad but the same too was dismissed upholding the tenants' objection. The appellant thereafter filed a writ petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution before the High Court challenging the correctness of the view taken by the Revenue Courts. The High Court by its o'rder dated 12-1-1976 dismissed the writ petition on the finding that the view taken by the Revenue Courts in upholding the tenants' objection to the maintainability of the eviction suit was correct. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the aforesaid order of the High Court.

(3.) There is no dispute that u/S.31A of the Act a landlord has a right to determine tenancy of agricultural land and to evict the tenant on fulfilling the conditions prescribed therein. The conditions prescribed are that if the landlord has no other land of his own and if he has not been cultivating personally any other land, he is entitled to take possession of the land let out to a tenant to the extent of permissible ceiling area. If the land cultivated by the landlord personally is less than the ceiling area he is entitled to take possession of so much area of land as would be sufficient to make up the area in his possession to the extent of ceiling area, further the income by the cultivation of the land of which he is entitled to take possession should be the principal source of income for his maintenance. These conditions as laid down in cls. (a), (b) and (c) of S. 31 A of the Act must be satisfied for making an application for the eviction of a tenant from agricultural land. In addition to these conditions, cl. (d) further prescribes additional conditions which must also be fulfilled by the landlord. S. 31 A(d) as amended by the Gujarat Act No. XVI of 1960 reads as under: