VISHWANATH RUPCHAND PATIL Vs. BOMBAY REVENUE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition raises some interesting questions arising: under the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act, 1951.

(2.) THE petitioner before us is a tenant of field survey No. 7 of mouza Ratir tahsil Khamgaon, district Buldana, and respondent No. 4 is the landlord thereof. Sometime in December 1956 this respondent gave a notice to the petitioner under Section 9(1) of the Act, terminating the tenancy on the ground: that the respondent required the land for cultivating it personally. It may be mentioned that under the lease the petitioner was liable to pay to the respondent half share in the crops and was also liable to pay the land revenue of Rs. 51 assessed on the field. Early in January the petitioner delivered some grain to the respondent which according to the petitioner represented' respondent No. 4's half share in the grain. According to the petitioner he subsequently delivered half share in the kadba, kutar etc., but according to the respondent he did not receive anything beyond his half share in the grain harvested from the field.

(3.) THE petitioner preferred an appeal before the Revenue Tribunal which it dismissed. He has, therefore, come up to this Court.