TARABAI MADHAORAO Vs. BOMBAY REVENUE TRIBUNAL AT NAGPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order in this Special Civil Application shall also govern the disposal of Special Civil Application No. 60 of 1958. The facts as also the points. arising in both these Special Civil Applications are common and a common argument was addressed by consent of counsel concerned. It will be sufficient to state the facts in Special Civil Application No. 59 of 1958.

(2.) THE fourth respondent Ganesh was a protected lessee of the petitioner. On 23-12-52, the land-holder gave him notice terminating his lease under the provisions of S. 9 (1) of the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act on the ground that the former required the land for cultivating it personally. In pursuance of this notice, the fourth respondent consented to the delivery of possession and possession was delivered to the landholder on 1-4-1953. A few months later, on 23-8-1954, the former protected lessee Ganesh Put in an application under S. 9 (6) of the Act against the petitioner, and three other persons who were impleaded because there was some dispute as to who was the landholder. By that application, the fourth respondent prayed that field No. 111 of which he was the former protected lessee should be placed in his possession because the landholder had instead of cultivating the field at home as stated in his notice under S. 9 (1) leased it out to another person Kashirao, the seventh respondent. The application was heard by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Achalpur, who dismissed it, and in appeal the Additional Deputy Commissoner maintained the dismissal of the application. In second appeal a division Bench of the Bombay Revenue Tribunal set aside the decisions of the Sub-Divisional Officer and the Additional Deputy Commissioner and allowed the application. The short question which arises for decision upon this petition may now be stated,

(3.) SECTION 8 (l) (g) of the Act runs as follows: