LAWS(BOM)-1951-8-2

DIGAMBAR GOPAL MARATHE Vs. VITHOBA JOGU HAGIR

Decided On August 23, 1951
DIGAMBAR GOPAL MARATHE Appellant
V/S
VITHOBA JOGU HAGIR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal arises out of a decision of the Assistant Judge, Satara, by which he allowed au appeal of the original defendant, against whom a decree for possession was passed by the trial Court, and ordered the suit of the plaintiff to be dismissed.

(2.) The plaintiff who is the present appellant filed Suit NO. 442 of 1945 in order to recover possession of the property in suit, a land at Wai, from the defendant, who is respondent in this appeal, on the allegation that the defendant was his annual tenant, that the agreed rent was Rs. 90 per year and that the said tenancy had been terminated by the plaintiff by giving him (defendant) a notice under Section 84, Bombay Land; Revenue Code. The notice wag given on 13- 11-1944, and it is the case of the plaintiff that the tenancy of the defendant was terminated thereby with effect from 31-3-1945. Notwithstanding the termination of tenancy the defendant did not quit the land and hence the present suit was filed by the plaintiff on 14-11-1945, claiming to recover possession of the property from the defendant,

(3.) One of the grounds, indeed the principal ground, on which the suit was resisted by the defendant was that ha was a protected tenant under the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy Act. It was contended by him that he had been holding the laud and cultivating it personally continuously for a period of more than six years immediately preceding 1-4-1944, that he had never committed any default in the payment of rent and that accordingly ho was not liable to be evicted from the land. The other defence taken by him was that he was entitled to the protection of the Small Holders Act.